Student was 'days away' from terror attack
By Channel 4 News | July 27, 2009
A secret immigration court hears evidence that a Pakistani student used coded emails to plan a major terrorist attack in Britain.
A Pakistani student was just "days away" from a major attack, an immigration court heard today, as intelligence officials alleged the man - named only as XC - had used coded emails to discuss a terror plot.
The student was detained during police raids in April, which were suddenly brought forward after former police chief Bob Quick inadvertently revealed the details on a document he was photographed carrying into Downing Street.
At a bail hearing, lawyers for XC said the case against him was "pitiful", with no evidence linking him to bomb making.
Showing posts with label inadvertent. Show all posts
Showing posts with label inadvertent. Show all posts
Channel 4 News Student was 'days away' from terror attack
Monday, July 27, 2009
Filed under
Bob Quick,
bomb,
email,
inadvertent
by Winter Patriot
on Monday, July 27, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
Police One : Disruption vs. prosecution and the Manchester plot
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Terrorism Prevention and Response Article: Disruption vs. prosecution and the Manchester plot
By Fred Burton and Scott Stewart | | April 26, 2009
On April 8, British authorities mounted a series of raids in Merseyside, Manchester and Lancashire that resulted in the arrest of 12 men suspected of being involved in a plot to conduct attacks over the Easter holiday weekend. In a press conference the following day, Prime Minister Gordon Brown noted that the men arrested were allegedly involved in “a very big terrorist plot.” British authorities have alleged that those arrested sought to conduct suicide bombing attacks against a list of soft targets that included shopping centers, a train station and a nightclub.
The searches and arrests targeting the suspects purportedly involved in the plot, which was dubbed Operation Pathway, had to be accelerated after Bob Quick, the assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police in charge of terrorism investigations, inadvertently allowed reporters to see a classified document pertaining to the operation as he was entering 10 Downing Street to brief Brown and Home Secretary Jacqui Smith on April 8. An embarrassed Quick resigned April 9 over the gaffe.
In spite of the leak, the British authorities were successful in detaining all of the targeted suspects, though the authorities have reportedly not been able to recover explosive material or other bomb-making evidence they were seeking. British authorities arrested 12 suspects, 11 of whom were Pakistani citizens. Smith told British Parliament on April 20 that all 11 of the Pakistani nationals entered the United Kingdom on student visas. The youngest of the Pakistani suspects, who is reportedly still a teenager, was remanded to the custody of British immigration authorities to face deportation proceedings April 9. The rest of the 11 suspects were released by British authorities April 21, though ten reportedly were placed in the custody of immigration officials.
Many of the specific details of the plot have not yet come out, and due to the sensitive nature of the intelligence sources and methods involved in these types of investigations, more details may never be fully divulged now that there will be no criminal trial. However, when viewed in the historical and tactical context of other terror plots and attacks (in the United Kingdom and elsewhere), there are some very interesting conclusions that can be drawn from this series of events and the few facts that have been released to the public so far.
This case also highlights the tension that exists within the counterterrorism community between advocates of strategies to disrupt terrorist attacks and those who want to ensure that terror suspects can be convicted in a court of law.
Targets
Among of the most significant things that have come to light so far regarding the thwarted plot are the alleged targets. According to press reports, the British MI5 surveillance teams assigned to monitor the activities of the purported plotters observed some of them videotaping themselves outside of the Arndale and Trafford shopping centers in Manchester, as well as at St. Ann’s Square, which lies in the center of Manchester’s main shopping district. Other reports suggest that the plotters had also conducted surveillance of Manchester’s Piccadilly train station, an intercity train station that is one of the busiest in the United Kingdom outside London, and Manchester’s Birdcage nightclub.
These targets are significant for several reasons. First, they are all soft targets — that is, targets with very little security. As STRATFOR has pointed out for several years now, since counterterrorism efforts have been stepped up in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, and as the tactical capability of groups like al Qaeda has been degraded, jihadist operatives have had less success targeting hardened targets and have turned instead to striking soft targets.
While authorities have moved to protect high-value targets, there simply are far too many potential targets to protect them all. Governments are stretched thin just trying to protect important government buildings, bridges, dams, nuclear power plants, airports and mass-transit systems in their jurisdiction. The reality on the ground is that there are not nearly enough resources to protect them all, much less every potential location where people concentrate in large groups — like shopping centers and nightclubs. This means that some targets are unprotected and are therefore, by definition, soft.
The selection of soft targets in this case indicates that the alleged Manchester plotters did not possess the operational capability to strike more strategic, high-value targets. While attacks against soft targets can be tragic and quite bloody, they will not have the same effect as a successful attack on high-value targets such as Parliament, the London Stock Exchange or a nuclear power station.
It is also very interesting that the plotters were purportedly looking to hit soft targets in Manchester and not soft targets in London. London, as the capital and a city that has been the center of several plots and attacks, is generally on a higher alert than the rest of the country and therefore would likely be seen as more difficult to target. Additionally, many of the suspects lived in the Manchester area, and as we have previously discussed, grassroots operatives, who are not as well-trained as their transnational brethren, tend to “think globally and act locally,” meaning that they tend to plan their attacks in familiar places where they are comfortable operating, rather than in strange and potentially more hostile environment.
In addition to targeting locations like shopping centers and the train station, where there were expected to be large crowds over the holiday weekend, the alleged plotters also apparently looked at the Birdcage nightclub, an establishment that is famous for its “flamboyant and spectacular” shows featuring female impersonators. This is a location the alleged plotters likely considered a symbol of Western decadence (like establishments that serve alcohol in Muslim countries).
Flawed Tradecraft
As noted above, the alleged plotters had been under surveillance by MI5. This indicates that their operational security had been compromised, either via human or technical means. Furthermore, the suspects did not appear to possess any surveillance detection capability — or even much situational awareness — as they went out into Manchester to conduct pre-operational surveillance of potential targets while under government surveillance themselves. Furthermore, the suspects’ surveillance techniques appear to have been very rudimentary in that they lacked both cover for action and cover for status while conducting their surveillance operations.
This aspect of the investigation reinforces two very important points that STRATFOR has been making for some time now. First, most militant groups do not provide very good surveillance training and as a result, poor surveillance tradecraft has long proven to be an Achilles’ heel for militants. Second, because of this weakness, countersurveillance operations can be very effective at catching militant operatives when they are most vulnerable — during the surveillance phase of the terrorist attack cycle.
Media reports indicated that during Operation Pathway, British authorities intercepted a series of Internet exchanges between the suspects suggesting a terror strike was imminent. Furthermore, among the locations raided April 8 was the Cyber Net Cafe in Cheetham Hill, an establishment where British authorities observed the suspects using computers to communicate. Not only is this electronic surveillance significant in that it allowed the authorities to surmise the approximate timing of the attack, but perhaps just as important, this ability to monitor the suspects’ communications will allow the authorities to identify other militants in the United Kingdom and beyond.
Indeed, in several previous cases related to the United Kingdom, such as the investigations involving the U.S. arrest of Mohammed Junaid Babar and the U.K. arrest of Younis Tsouli, authorities were able to use communications from militant suspects to identify and roll up militant cells in other countries. Therefore, we will not be at all surprised to hear at some point in the future that British authorities were able use the communications of the recently arrested suspects to tip off authorities in the United States, Canada, other European countries or elsewhere about the militant activities of people the suspects were in contact with.
Links to Pakistan
And speaking of elsewhere, as noted above, 11 of the arrested suspects were Pakistani nationals who entered the U.K. on student visas. At this point it is not exactly clear if the British believe the 11 suspects were radical militants specifically sent to the United Kingdom to conduct attacks or if they arrived without malicious intent and were then radicalized in the Petri dish of Islamist extremism that so rapidly replicates inside the British Muslim community — what we have come to refer to as Londonistan.
Many British lawmakers and media reports have made a huge issue out of the fact that 11 of the alleged plotters entered the United Kingdom on student visas, but even if the suspects were radicals who used student visas as a way to enter the United Kingdom, this is by no means a new tactic as some are reporting. STRATFOR has long discussed the use of student visas, bogus political asylum claims and other forms of immigration fraud that have commonly been used by militants. In fact, there have been numerous prior examples of jihadist operatives using student visas, such as the following:
* While Sept. 11 hijackers Mohamed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi initially entered the United States on tourist visas, they were approved for M-1 student visas shortly before carrying out their attacks.
* Youssef Samir Megahed, who was arrested in possession of an improvised explosive device (IED) in August 2007 and later sentenced to a 15-year prison sentence, was a Kuwaiti engineering student who entered the United States on a student visa.
* Mohammed Aatique, a convicted member of the “Virginia Jihad Network” who was sentenced to 10 years in prison for conspiracy and weapons violations, also entered the United States from Pakistan as an engineering student.
In some ways, connections between the alleged plotters and militant groups in Pakistan such as al Qaeda or the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) would be more analytically significant than if they turn out to be grassroots operatives. The operational security, skills and terrorist tradecraft exhibited by the plotters are about what one would expect to see in a grassroots militant organization. This level of sophistication is, however, far less than one would expect from a transnational organization. Therefore, if this was an al Qaeda operation, it shows how far the group has fallen in the past eight years. If it was the TTP, it means that our previous estimate of their operational ability outside of Pakistan was fairly accurate.
Lack of Evidence
To date, the British authorities have not been able to find the explosive material and IED components they were expecting to find. This might mean that the materials may still be hidden somewhere and could be used in a future attack. It is also quite possible, and perhaps more likely, that this lack of evidence is an indication that the plot was not quite as far along as the British authorities believed. Perhaps the references the suspects allegedly made to launching the attack on a bank holiday pertained to a holiday later in the year.
While the plot as described by the British authorities would not have been a significant, strategic threat to the United Kingdom, it could have been quite deadly and could very well have surpassed the July 7, 2005, attacks in terms of final body count. Because of this potential destruction, it is quite possible that the British government decided to err on the side of disruption rather than on the side of prosecution. This is something we have seen in the investigation of several other plots in recent years in the United Kingdom and elsewhere, perhaps most notably in the August 2006 Heathrow plot, in which a cell of operatives was preparing to bomb a series of trans-Atlantic airline flights using liquid explosives.
It is much more difficult to obtain a conviction for a conspiracy to commit an act of terrorism than it is to obtain a conviction for an attack that was successfully conducted. Once the attack is executed, there is no longer much room to wrangle in court over things such as intent or capability. Governments also frequently know things via intelligence they cannot prove to the standards required for a conviction in a court of law.
This was seen in the Heathrow case, where only three of the eight suspects were convicted of the main charges during that trial, which ended in September 2008. (The other five suspects had pled guilty to lesser charges.) During that case there was reportedly some tension between the U.S. and British authorities over when to wrap up the Heathrow plotters — some of the British apparently wanted to wait a while longer to secure more damning evidence, while the Americans were reportedly more interested in ensuring that the plot was disrupted than they were in obtaining convictions. It is likely the same dynamic was at play during the investigation of the Manchester case.
Although Quick’s disclosure did hasten the launch of Operation Pathway by a few hours, it did not significantly alter the timing of the investigation — the British authorities were preparing to execute an array of searches and arrests. From an ethical standpoint (and, not insignificantly in this day and age, a political aspect) it is deemed better by many to disrupt a plot early and risk the terror suspects being acquitted than it is to accidentally allow them to conduct an attack while waiting to gather the evidence required for an ironclad court case. Disruption can have an impact on the success of prosecutions, but in the eyes of a growing number of policymakers, that impact is offset by the lives it saves.
~~~~
Fred Burton is one of the world’s foremost authorities on security, terrorists and terrorist organizations. In his capacity as Vice President for Counterterrorism and Corporate Security, Mr. Burton oversees Stratfor’s terrorism intelligence service and consults with clients on security-related issues affecting their organizations or personal safety. He leads a team of terrorism experts and a global network of human intelligence sources to analyze and forecast the most significant events and trends related to terrorism and counterterrorism. Before joining Stratfor, Mr. Burton served as a special agent in counterterrorism for the U.S. Department of State, where he was involved in many high-profile operations. He orchestrated the arrest of Ramzi Yousef, mastermind of the first World Trade Center bombing, and investigated cases such as the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, the killing of Rabbi Meir Kahane, al Qaeda’s New York City bombing plots before 9/11, and the Libyan-backed terrorist attacks against diplomats in Sanaa and Khartoum. He has also served as the U.S. liaison officer to several international security, intelligence and law enforcement agencies, providing consulting on global intelligence and threat identification. In addition, Mr. Burton has revolutionized the field of security by designing a unique and specialized protective program to safeguard CEOs, their families, employees and physical facilities. His strategy is highly valued and has been implemented by governments and a number of the world’s leading corporations. For a special offer to get a copy of GHOST, and to read additional information about Fred Burton and his role at Stratfor, please click here
By Fred Burton and Scott Stewart | | April 26, 2009
On April 8, British authorities mounted a series of raids in Merseyside, Manchester and Lancashire that resulted in the arrest of 12 men suspected of being involved in a plot to conduct attacks over the Easter holiday weekend. In a press conference the following day, Prime Minister Gordon Brown noted that the men arrested were allegedly involved in “a very big terrorist plot.” British authorities have alleged that those arrested sought to conduct suicide bombing attacks against a list of soft targets that included shopping centers, a train station and a nightclub.
The searches and arrests targeting the suspects purportedly involved in the plot, which was dubbed Operation Pathway, had to be accelerated after Bob Quick, the assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police in charge of terrorism investigations, inadvertently allowed reporters to see a classified document pertaining to the operation as he was entering 10 Downing Street to brief Brown and Home Secretary Jacqui Smith on April 8. An embarrassed Quick resigned April 9 over the gaffe.
In spite of the leak, the British authorities were successful in detaining all of the targeted suspects, though the authorities have reportedly not been able to recover explosive material or other bomb-making evidence they were seeking. British authorities arrested 12 suspects, 11 of whom were Pakistani citizens. Smith told British Parliament on April 20 that all 11 of the Pakistani nationals entered the United Kingdom on student visas. The youngest of the Pakistani suspects, who is reportedly still a teenager, was remanded to the custody of British immigration authorities to face deportation proceedings April 9. The rest of the 11 suspects were released by British authorities April 21, though ten reportedly were placed in the custody of immigration officials.
Many of the specific details of the plot have not yet come out, and due to the sensitive nature of the intelligence sources and methods involved in these types of investigations, more details may never be fully divulged now that there will be no criminal trial. However, when viewed in the historical and tactical context of other terror plots and attacks (in the United Kingdom and elsewhere), there are some very interesting conclusions that can be drawn from this series of events and the few facts that have been released to the public so far.
This case also highlights the tension that exists within the counterterrorism community between advocates of strategies to disrupt terrorist attacks and those who want to ensure that terror suspects can be convicted in a court of law.
Targets
Among of the most significant things that have come to light so far regarding the thwarted plot are the alleged targets. According to press reports, the British MI5 surveillance teams assigned to monitor the activities of the purported plotters observed some of them videotaping themselves outside of the Arndale and Trafford shopping centers in Manchester, as well as at St. Ann’s Square, which lies in the center of Manchester’s main shopping district. Other reports suggest that the plotters had also conducted surveillance of Manchester’s Piccadilly train station, an intercity train station that is one of the busiest in the United Kingdom outside London, and Manchester’s Birdcage nightclub.
These targets are significant for several reasons. First, they are all soft targets — that is, targets with very little security. As STRATFOR has pointed out for several years now, since counterterrorism efforts have been stepped up in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, and as the tactical capability of groups like al Qaeda has been degraded, jihadist operatives have had less success targeting hardened targets and have turned instead to striking soft targets.
While authorities have moved to protect high-value targets, there simply are far too many potential targets to protect them all. Governments are stretched thin just trying to protect important government buildings, bridges, dams, nuclear power plants, airports and mass-transit systems in their jurisdiction. The reality on the ground is that there are not nearly enough resources to protect them all, much less every potential location where people concentrate in large groups — like shopping centers and nightclubs. This means that some targets are unprotected and are therefore, by definition, soft.
The selection of soft targets in this case indicates that the alleged Manchester plotters did not possess the operational capability to strike more strategic, high-value targets. While attacks against soft targets can be tragic and quite bloody, they will not have the same effect as a successful attack on high-value targets such as Parliament, the London Stock Exchange or a nuclear power station.
It is also very interesting that the plotters were purportedly looking to hit soft targets in Manchester and not soft targets in London. London, as the capital and a city that has been the center of several plots and attacks, is generally on a higher alert than the rest of the country and therefore would likely be seen as more difficult to target. Additionally, many of the suspects lived in the Manchester area, and as we have previously discussed, grassroots operatives, who are not as well-trained as their transnational brethren, tend to “think globally and act locally,” meaning that they tend to plan their attacks in familiar places where they are comfortable operating, rather than in strange and potentially more hostile environment.
In addition to targeting locations like shopping centers and the train station, where there were expected to be large crowds over the holiday weekend, the alleged plotters also apparently looked at the Birdcage nightclub, an establishment that is famous for its “flamboyant and spectacular” shows featuring female impersonators. This is a location the alleged plotters likely considered a symbol of Western decadence (like establishments that serve alcohol in Muslim countries).
Flawed Tradecraft
As noted above, the alleged plotters had been under surveillance by MI5. This indicates that their operational security had been compromised, either via human or technical means. Furthermore, the suspects did not appear to possess any surveillance detection capability — or even much situational awareness — as they went out into Manchester to conduct pre-operational surveillance of potential targets while under government surveillance themselves. Furthermore, the suspects’ surveillance techniques appear to have been very rudimentary in that they lacked both cover for action and cover for status while conducting their surveillance operations.
This aspect of the investigation reinforces two very important points that STRATFOR has been making for some time now. First, most militant groups do not provide very good surveillance training and as a result, poor surveillance tradecraft has long proven to be an Achilles’ heel for militants. Second, because of this weakness, countersurveillance operations can be very effective at catching militant operatives when they are most vulnerable — during the surveillance phase of the terrorist attack cycle.
Media reports indicated that during Operation Pathway, British authorities intercepted a series of Internet exchanges between the suspects suggesting a terror strike was imminent. Furthermore, among the locations raided April 8 was the Cyber Net Cafe in Cheetham Hill, an establishment where British authorities observed the suspects using computers to communicate. Not only is this electronic surveillance significant in that it allowed the authorities to surmise the approximate timing of the attack, but perhaps just as important, this ability to monitor the suspects’ communications will allow the authorities to identify other militants in the United Kingdom and beyond.
Indeed, in several previous cases related to the United Kingdom, such as the investigations involving the U.S. arrest of Mohammed Junaid Babar and the U.K. arrest of Younis Tsouli, authorities were able to use communications from militant suspects to identify and roll up militant cells in other countries. Therefore, we will not be at all surprised to hear at some point in the future that British authorities were able use the communications of the recently arrested suspects to tip off authorities in the United States, Canada, other European countries or elsewhere about the militant activities of people the suspects were in contact with.
Links to Pakistan
And speaking of elsewhere, as noted above, 11 of the arrested suspects were Pakistani nationals who entered the U.K. on student visas. At this point it is not exactly clear if the British believe the 11 suspects were radical militants specifically sent to the United Kingdom to conduct attacks or if they arrived without malicious intent and were then radicalized in the Petri dish of Islamist extremism that so rapidly replicates inside the British Muslim community — what we have come to refer to as Londonistan.
Many British lawmakers and media reports have made a huge issue out of the fact that 11 of the alleged plotters entered the United Kingdom on student visas, but even if the suspects were radicals who used student visas as a way to enter the United Kingdom, this is by no means a new tactic as some are reporting. STRATFOR has long discussed the use of student visas, bogus political asylum claims and other forms of immigration fraud that have commonly been used by militants. In fact, there have been numerous prior examples of jihadist operatives using student visas, such as the following:
* While Sept. 11 hijackers Mohamed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi initially entered the United States on tourist visas, they were approved for M-1 student visas shortly before carrying out their attacks.
* Youssef Samir Megahed, who was arrested in possession of an improvised explosive device (IED) in August 2007 and later sentenced to a 15-year prison sentence, was a Kuwaiti engineering student who entered the United States on a student visa.
* Mohammed Aatique, a convicted member of the “Virginia Jihad Network” who was sentenced to 10 years in prison for conspiracy and weapons violations, also entered the United States from Pakistan as an engineering student.
In some ways, connections between the alleged plotters and militant groups in Pakistan such as al Qaeda or the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) would be more analytically significant than if they turn out to be grassroots operatives. The operational security, skills and terrorist tradecraft exhibited by the plotters are about what one would expect to see in a grassroots militant organization. This level of sophistication is, however, far less than one would expect from a transnational organization. Therefore, if this was an al Qaeda operation, it shows how far the group has fallen in the past eight years. If it was the TTP, it means that our previous estimate of their operational ability outside of Pakistan was fairly accurate.
Lack of Evidence
To date, the British authorities have not been able to find the explosive material and IED components they were expecting to find. This might mean that the materials may still be hidden somewhere and could be used in a future attack. It is also quite possible, and perhaps more likely, that this lack of evidence is an indication that the plot was not quite as far along as the British authorities believed. Perhaps the references the suspects allegedly made to launching the attack on a bank holiday pertained to a holiday later in the year.
While the plot as described by the British authorities would not have been a significant, strategic threat to the United Kingdom, it could have been quite deadly and could very well have surpassed the July 7, 2005, attacks in terms of final body count. Because of this potential destruction, it is quite possible that the British government decided to err on the side of disruption rather than on the side of prosecution. This is something we have seen in the investigation of several other plots in recent years in the United Kingdom and elsewhere, perhaps most notably in the August 2006 Heathrow plot, in which a cell of operatives was preparing to bomb a series of trans-Atlantic airline flights using liquid explosives.
It is much more difficult to obtain a conviction for a conspiracy to commit an act of terrorism than it is to obtain a conviction for an attack that was successfully conducted. Once the attack is executed, there is no longer much room to wrangle in court over things such as intent or capability. Governments also frequently know things via intelligence they cannot prove to the standards required for a conviction in a court of law.
This was seen in the Heathrow case, where only three of the eight suspects were convicted of the main charges during that trial, which ended in September 2008. (The other five suspects had pled guilty to lesser charges.) During that case there was reportedly some tension between the U.S. and British authorities over when to wrap up the Heathrow plotters — some of the British apparently wanted to wait a while longer to secure more damning evidence, while the Americans were reportedly more interested in ensuring that the plot was disrupted than they were in obtaining convictions. It is likely the same dynamic was at play during the investigation of the Manchester case.
Although Quick’s disclosure did hasten the launch of Operation Pathway by a few hours, it did not significantly alter the timing of the investigation — the British authorities were preparing to execute an array of searches and arrests. From an ethical standpoint (and, not insignificantly in this day and age, a political aspect) it is deemed better by many to disrupt a plot early and risk the terror suspects being acquitted than it is to accidentally allow them to conduct an attack while waiting to gather the evidence required for an ironclad court case. Disruption can have an impact on the success of prosecutions, but in the eyes of a growing number of policymakers, that impact is offset by the lives it saves.
~~~~
Fred Burton is one of the world’s foremost authorities on security, terrorists and terrorist organizations. In his capacity as Vice President for Counterterrorism and Corporate Security, Mr. Burton oversees Stratfor’s terrorism intelligence service and consults with clients on security-related issues affecting their organizations or personal safety. He leads a team of terrorism experts and a global network of human intelligence sources to analyze and forecast the most significant events and trends related to terrorism and counterterrorism. Before joining Stratfor, Mr. Burton served as a special agent in counterterrorism for the U.S. Department of State, where he was involved in many high-profile operations. He orchestrated the arrest of Ramzi Yousef, mastermind of the first World Trade Center bombing, and investigated cases such as the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, the killing of Rabbi Meir Kahane, al Qaeda’s New York City bombing plots before 9/11, and the Libyan-backed terrorist attacks against diplomats in Sanaa and Khartoum. He has also served as the U.S. liaison officer to several international security, intelligence and law enforcement agencies, providing consulting on global intelligence and threat identification. In addition, Mr. Burton has revolutionized the field of security by designing a unique and specialized protective program to safeguard CEOs, their families, employees and physical facilities. His strategy is highly valued and has been implemented by governments and a number of the world’s leading corporations. For a special offer to get a copy of GHOST, and to read additional information about Fred Burton and his role at Stratfor, please click here
Filed under
Bob Quick,
bomb,
Easter,
explosives,
inadvertent,
Manchester
by Winter Patriot
on Sunday, April 26, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
Chicago Tribune : ENGLAND: Last of 12 terrorism suspects freed
Thursday, April 23, 2009
ENGLAND: Last of 12 terrorism suspects freed
Authorities claimed at the time of the arrests that police had disrupted 'a very big terrorist plot'
April 23, 2009
LONDON -- British police released the last of 12 suspects rounded up in a series of dramatic anti-terrorism raids earlier this month, without charging any of the men, authorities said Wednesday.
The news was an embarrassment for British authorities, including Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who claimed at the time of their arrests that police had disrupted "a very big terrorist plot" that had been monitored "for some time."
The arrests were rushed in part because a police commissioner inadvertently exposed details of the operation to a photographer outside the prime minister's office.
Police had to scramble to catch the suspects before they learned of the leak, forgoing their usual dawn raids for a dramatic series of daytime operations across northern England on April 8.
Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, one of the country's top counterterrorism officers, resigned after he exposed details of the operation.
Most of the men taken into custody were Pakistanis in Britain on student visas.
British officials have said they want to deport all but one of the men on national security grounds, but that may be difficult. A lawyer for three of the men said his clients would fight to continue their education in the United Kingdom, while Islamabad opposes deportation.
Authorities claimed at the time of the arrests that police had disrupted 'a very big terrorist plot'
April 23, 2009
LONDON -- British police released the last of 12 suspects rounded up in a series of dramatic anti-terrorism raids earlier this month, without charging any of the men, authorities said Wednesday.
The news was an embarrassment for British authorities, including Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who claimed at the time of their arrests that police had disrupted "a very big terrorist plot" that had been monitored "for some time."
The arrests were rushed in part because a police commissioner inadvertently exposed details of the operation to a photographer outside the prime minister's office.
Police had to scramble to catch the suspects before they learned of the leak, forgoing their usual dawn raids for a dramatic series of daytime operations across northern England on April 8.
Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, one of the country's top counterterrorism officers, resigned after he exposed details of the operation.
Most of the men taken into custody were Pakistanis in Britain on student visas.
British officials have said they want to deport all but one of the men on national security grounds, but that may be difficult. A lawyer for three of the men said his clients would fight to continue their education in the United Kingdom, while Islamabad opposes deportation.
Filed under
Bob Quick,
inadvertent
by Winter Patriot
on Thursday, April 23, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
Telegraph & Argus : Bradford man held in terror-plot raid demands pay-out
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Bradford man held in terror-plot raid demands pay-out
By Steve Wright | April 23, 2009
A Bradford man arrested after a swoop by anti-terror officers says he will claim compensation from the police for unlawful detention.
The 41-year-old family man, who has not been named, was one of 12 people arrested in anti-terror raids in the north-west on April 8. He was the only Briton detained. The rest were Pakistani nationals, with all but one holding student visas.
The planned raids had been brought forward after the Metropolitan Police’s assistant commissioner Bob Quick inadvertently revealed details of the operation, and later resigned.
An 18-year-old was released into the custody of the UK Border Agency within days. The others were all freed without charge yesterday after the Crown Prosecution Service said there was insufficient evidence.
The suspect’s links to Bradford were revealed by leading city law firm Khan’s Solicitors, based in Sunbridge Road, Bradford, who represented him.
Solicitor and director of the company, Rashid Majid, said they had won two legal arguments on behalf of their client, before a senior District Judge at Westminster magistrates court, and before a High Court judge, Mr Justice Black.
Mr Majid said: “We put forward two arguments, under Article 5 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
“One was that any suspect was entitled to be given adequate reasons for their arrest, and secondly they should have enough information so they could challenge the lawfulness of their detention. Both judges expressed serious concerns and Mr Justice Black held that there had been a breach of Article 5 and our client should be entitled to compensation.
“As a result, their detention for a week was held to be unlawful. We will now write to the police and ask them for proposals for compensation.”
Mr Majid said their client had never been arrested before and was of previous good character.
The suspect had been arrested at an address in Cheetham Hill, Manchester, but was formerly from Bradford and had worked in a cash and carry shop in West Bowling. Mr Majid said the client’s immediate plans now were to go back to Manchester and rebuild his life.
Three of the other suspects released yesterday – Sultan Sher, Mohammed Rizwan Sharif and Mohammed Umer Farooq – were represented by another Bradford solicitor, Mohammed Ayub, of Chambers Solicitors, also in Sunbridge Road.
Peter Fahy, Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, said they had had a duty to act and investigate.
“When it comes to the safety of the public we can’t take any chances – we must act on information we receive,” he said.
“We don’t take these decisions lightly and only carry out this kind of action if it was wholly justified.”
By Steve Wright | April 23, 2009
A Bradford man arrested after a swoop by anti-terror officers says he will claim compensation from the police for unlawful detention.
The 41-year-old family man, who has not been named, was one of 12 people arrested in anti-terror raids in the north-west on April 8. He was the only Briton detained. The rest were Pakistani nationals, with all but one holding student visas.
The planned raids had been brought forward after the Metropolitan Police’s assistant commissioner Bob Quick inadvertently revealed details of the operation, and later resigned.
An 18-year-old was released into the custody of the UK Border Agency within days. The others were all freed without charge yesterday after the Crown Prosecution Service said there was insufficient evidence.
The suspect’s links to Bradford were revealed by leading city law firm Khan’s Solicitors, based in Sunbridge Road, Bradford, who represented him.
Solicitor and director of the company, Rashid Majid, said they had won two legal arguments on behalf of their client, before a senior District Judge at Westminster magistrates court, and before a High Court judge, Mr Justice Black.
Mr Majid said: “We put forward two arguments, under Article 5 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
“One was that any suspect was entitled to be given adequate reasons for their arrest, and secondly they should have enough information so they could challenge the lawfulness of their detention. Both judges expressed serious concerns and Mr Justice Black held that there had been a breach of Article 5 and our client should be entitled to compensation.
“As a result, their detention for a week was held to be unlawful. We will now write to the police and ask them for proposals for compensation.”
Mr Majid said their client had never been arrested before and was of previous good character.
The suspect had been arrested at an address in Cheetham Hill, Manchester, but was formerly from Bradford and had worked in a cash and carry shop in West Bowling. Mr Majid said the client’s immediate plans now were to go back to Manchester and rebuild his life.
Three of the other suspects released yesterday – Sultan Sher, Mohammed Rizwan Sharif and Mohammed Umer Farooq – were represented by another Bradford solicitor, Mohammed Ayub, of Chambers Solicitors, also in Sunbridge Road.
Peter Fahy, Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, said they had had a duty to act and investigate.
“When it comes to the safety of the public we can’t take any chances – we must act on information we receive,” he said.
“We don’t take these decisions lightly and only carry out this kind of action if it was wholly justified.”
Filed under
Bob Quick,
inadvertent,
Manchester,
Mohammed Rizwan Sharif,
Mohammed Umer Farooq,
Sultan Sher
by Winter Patriot
on Thursday, April 23, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
Guardian : Lord Carlile calls inquiry into terror bomb plot raids
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Lord Carlile calls inquiry into terror bomb plot raids
Police deny error as 12 are freed without charge
Lawyers try to stop deportation to Pakistan
Sandra Laville and Helen Carter | April 23, 2009
The operation that led to 12 men being arrested on suspicion of plotting a large al-Qaida atrocity is to be investigated by Lord Carlile, the country's terror watchdog.
Carlile, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, said he would carry out a review into the raids, that took place in the north-west of England on the Wednesday before Easter, after all 12 suspects were released without charge.
As lawyers for some of the men said they would resist attempts to deport them to Pakistan, the chief constable of Greater Manchester police, who led the operation, denied his force had been embarrassed.
"I do not believe a mistake was made," said Peter Fahy. "We were faced with a very difficult decision."
The last two suspects were released into the custody of the UK Border Agency by the police yesterday, 24 hours after nine others had been transferred to the border agency for deportation without being charged.
A 12th suspect was released earlier in the operation. Eleven of the men are Pakistani nationals who entered the country on student visas. They now face deportation on the grounds of national security. The 12th is a British national.
Carlile said yesterday he alone had decided to launch an inquiry into the operation, which was co-ordinated by counterterrorist officers from the police in Manchester, London and the security service MI5. His investigation will start next month but he would not commit himself to making the report public.
"The questions I shall raise will centre on (but not necessarily be limited to) the nature and extent of the use of the Terrorism Act 2000 and connected legislation used for the purposes of the operation," he said.
He said the review did not necessarily imply criticism but was part of his ongoing activity. But the decision to mount an inquiry into the arrests, which led to comments by Gordon Brown that the police had foiled a "very big terrorist plot", will be viewed by some as reflecting concern over the way police and politicians are dealing with the terrorist threat.
Fahy acknowledged the concerns of the Muslim community in comments yesterday. But he stood by his force's decision to move in and make the arrests.
"When it comes to the safety of the public we can't take any chances - we must act on information we receive. We don't take these decisions lightly and only carry out this kind of action if it was wholly justified."
He said police were still gathering information but after consultation with the Crown Prosecution Service and a judge there had not been enough evidence to bring charges.
The Guardian understands that the decision to arrest the 12 on 8 April came after discussions between the security service MI5 and the police. Fahy denied that there had been any disagreement with the security services.
There was hope early on that evidence might be found of bombmaking material or on computer disks seized from the suspects' homes, but in the event the police did not find enough evidence even to convince a judge that the men could be held and questioned for the full 28 days available under terror legislation.
A spokesman for Brown said yesterday: "We are seeking to remove these individuals on grounds of national security. Where a foreign national poses a threat to the country we will seek to exclude or deport them where appropriate."
Inayat Bunglawala of the Muslim Council of Britain said the prime minister's comments on the arrests had been prejudicial and premature. "These arrests took place in very dramatic circumstances with students being pulled from universities and thrown to the floor. Instead of releasing them with good grace and making clear a mistake has been made the government is seeking to deport them citing a very vague national security threat."
The raids were brought forward after the country's then head of counterterrorism, assistant commissioner Bob Quick, inadvertently allowed details of the operation to be photographed outside Downing Street. Neither the police nor security services believe the raids were compromised by advancing them.
Police deny error as 12 are freed without charge
Lawyers try to stop deportation to Pakistan
Sandra Laville and Helen Carter | April 23, 2009
The operation that led to 12 men being arrested on suspicion of plotting a large al-Qaida atrocity is to be investigated by Lord Carlile, the country's terror watchdog.
Carlile, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, said he would carry out a review into the raids, that took place in the north-west of England on the Wednesday before Easter, after all 12 suspects were released without charge.
As lawyers for some of the men said they would resist attempts to deport them to Pakistan, the chief constable of Greater Manchester police, who led the operation, denied his force had been embarrassed.
"I do not believe a mistake was made," said Peter Fahy. "We were faced with a very difficult decision."
The last two suspects were released into the custody of the UK Border Agency by the police yesterday, 24 hours after nine others had been transferred to the border agency for deportation without being charged.
A 12th suspect was released earlier in the operation. Eleven of the men are Pakistani nationals who entered the country on student visas. They now face deportation on the grounds of national security. The 12th is a British national.
Carlile said yesterday he alone had decided to launch an inquiry into the operation, which was co-ordinated by counterterrorist officers from the police in Manchester, London and the security service MI5. His investigation will start next month but he would not commit himself to making the report public.
"The questions I shall raise will centre on (but not necessarily be limited to) the nature and extent of the use of the Terrorism Act 2000 and connected legislation used for the purposes of the operation," he said.
He said the review did not necessarily imply criticism but was part of his ongoing activity. But the decision to mount an inquiry into the arrests, which led to comments by Gordon Brown that the police had foiled a "very big terrorist plot", will be viewed by some as reflecting concern over the way police and politicians are dealing with the terrorist threat.
Fahy acknowledged the concerns of the Muslim community in comments yesterday. But he stood by his force's decision to move in and make the arrests.
"When it comes to the safety of the public we can't take any chances - we must act on information we receive. We don't take these decisions lightly and only carry out this kind of action if it was wholly justified."
He said police were still gathering information but after consultation with the Crown Prosecution Service and a judge there had not been enough evidence to bring charges.
The Guardian understands that the decision to arrest the 12 on 8 April came after discussions between the security service MI5 and the police. Fahy denied that there had been any disagreement with the security services.
There was hope early on that evidence might be found of bombmaking material or on computer disks seized from the suspects' homes, but in the event the police did not find enough evidence even to convince a judge that the men could be held and questioned for the full 28 days available under terror legislation.
A spokesman for Brown said yesterday: "We are seeking to remove these individuals on grounds of national security. Where a foreign national poses a threat to the country we will seek to exclude or deport them where appropriate."
Inayat Bunglawala of the Muslim Council of Britain said the prime minister's comments on the arrests had been prejudicial and premature. "These arrests took place in very dramatic circumstances with students being pulled from universities and thrown to the floor. Instead of releasing them with good grace and making clear a mistake has been made the government is seeking to deport them citing a very vague national security threat."
The raids were brought forward after the country's then head of counterterrorism, assistant commissioner Bob Quick, inadvertently allowed details of the operation to be photographed outside Downing Street. Neither the police nor security services believe the raids were compromised by advancing them.
Filed under
Bob Quick,
bomb,
Easter,
inadvertent,
Manchester
by Winter Patriot
on Wednesday, April 22, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
Guardian : All 12 men arrested during anti-terror raids released without charge
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
All 12 men arrested during anti-terror raids released without charge
Police face criticism over operation but deny that bringing arrests forward disrupted investigation
Sandra Laville, Richard Norton-Taylor and Stephen Bates | April 22, 2009
The government today faced a barrage of criticism after police released without charge the remaining 11 suspects arrested a fortnight ago in the north-west of England over an alleged terror plot.
The last two men to be released joined nine others given their freedom last night and one freed on 11 April.
Opposition parties, human rights lawyers and Muslim groups accused the government of mistreating the suspects and botching the anti-terror operation.
The shadow security minister Baroness Neville-Jones said: "It is very worrying that, following an investigation based on strong intelligence into what the prime minister described as a serious terrorist plot, the police have not been able to present sufficient evidence to the Crown Prosecution Service on which it could lay charges against any of the 12 arrested."
Shami Chakrabarti, director of human rights group Liberty, said: "In the vital task of policing open societies, it is inevitable that you arrest more people than you charge and that sometimes suspicion will never be converted into evidence. But national security deportation is an extremely shadowy process and we need assurances from ministers that these powers will only be used for public safety and not for political signalling."
Gordon Brown had claimed the operation uncovered a "very big plot" against the UK.
In a statement, Greater Manchester police said: "The 11 men were questioned and the evidence gathered presented to the CPS who advised there was insufficient evidence gathered within the permitted timescales which would have allowed a warrant of further detention to be gathered or charges to be pursued.
"It is not possible to bail people under terrorism legislation so the men were released.
"Public safety is always the police's top priority and all information is fully considered and acted upon appropriately to minimise risk to the public."
In a press conference on the steps of the police headquarters, chief constable Peter Fahy said: "These people are innocent and they walk away … there are constant threats to this country but we totally respect the situation, we respect that they are innocent until proved guilty."
Fahy denied that there had been a dispute with the security services or that bringing the arrests forward by up to 12 hours had disrupted the investigation. He criticised speculation by outsiders, including retired officers, and said: "I have not conducted any speculation. I do not feel embarrassed or humiliated by what we have done because we have carried out our duty. I don't think a mistake has been made at all."
The BBC reported that security services continued to maintain that a terrorist plot had been disrupted by the operation.
Nine of the men are due to be deported after being handed over to the UK Border Agency but it was not immediately clear what would happen to the last two men. One of the 11 is understood to be a British national. The releases came after investigators spent 13 days searching for evidence following the arrests from a number of addresses in Greater Manchester, Liverpool and Lancashire under the Terrorism Act.
The police operation was condemned today by a spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain. Inayat Bunglawala told Radio 4's Today programme: "When these arrests took place in very dramatic circumstances with students being pulled from universities and thrown to the floor, we were told by the prime minister, no less, that this was part of a very big terrorist plot. Clearly there just has not been the evidence produced to substantiate such a plot."
The raids led to the resignation of the country's leading counterterrorism officer, Bob Quick, after he inadvertently allowed details of the operation to be photographed. Before the men had been interviewed the prime minister spoke of how the police had foiled a "very big plot", but as early as last Monday it emerged the government had spoken to Pakistani officials seeking reassurances that if the men were deported they would not be tortured.
The Guardian understands the decision to arrest the suspects on 8 April came after a three-way row between MI5, senior officers in the Metropolitan police and the Greater Manchester police. MI5 was strongly of the opinion that the arrests should wait while more intelligence was gathered. But in an example of the tensions between Whitehall counterterrorism officials and their counterparts in the police, the decision was made to take "executive action" even though the intelligence suggested there was little evidence to charge the suspects.
It is understood anti-terrorist officers in the Met disagreed with their counterparts in Greater Manchester that the arrests should be made. But the concern that there was a threat to the public led to the decision being made to move in.
Investigators had hoped to find something at the suspects' homes. But after initially hunting for, and failing to find, bomb-making equipment, they turned to the computers hoping that some evidence of a plot would turn up. They found nothing substantial.
Despite media reports and the plot being talked up by Brown, there was never any evidence that the suspects had identified targets for an attack.
The arrests came several hours earlier than the police had planned after Quick accidentally allowed a top secret briefing document on the raids, Operation Pathway, to be caught on camera by a photographer outside Downing Street, when he went to brief ministers on the action. The error led to his resignation after politicians condemned the security breach.
Officers from the north-west counterterrorism unit arrested 12 men under the Terrorism Act following the raids on 8 April. Of the 12 men initially arrested, 11 were Pakistani nationals, 10 held student visas and one was British.
A 12th suspect, an 18-year-old, was released without charge and handed to the Border Agency for deportation on 11 April.
The arrests led to claims that the student visa system contained loopholes which allowed abuse by people attempting to enter the country for illegal activities.
The government has admitted that the system is flawed and, two weeks ago, introduced tougher measures designed to root out false applications. At the time of the arrests counterterrorism sources expressed the fear that al-Qaida was using Pakistani students not known to the security services.
Sixty-eight people are currently on trial, or awaiting trial for alleged terrorist offences.
According to the Home Office, from 11 September 2001 to 31 March 2007, 1,228 terror-related arrests were made, excluding Northern Ireland.
Since January 2007, 92 people have been convicted in significant terrorist cases with 47 people pleading guilty.
Police face criticism over operation but deny that bringing arrests forward disrupted investigation
Sandra Laville, Richard Norton-Taylor and Stephen Bates | April 22, 2009
The government today faced a barrage of criticism after police released without charge the remaining 11 suspects arrested a fortnight ago in the north-west of England over an alleged terror plot.
The last two men to be released joined nine others given their freedom last night and one freed on 11 April.
Opposition parties, human rights lawyers and Muslim groups accused the government of mistreating the suspects and botching the anti-terror operation.
The shadow security minister Baroness Neville-Jones said: "It is very worrying that, following an investigation based on strong intelligence into what the prime minister described as a serious terrorist plot, the police have not been able to present sufficient evidence to the Crown Prosecution Service on which it could lay charges against any of the 12 arrested."
Shami Chakrabarti, director of human rights group Liberty, said: "In the vital task of policing open societies, it is inevitable that you arrest more people than you charge and that sometimes suspicion will never be converted into evidence. But national security deportation is an extremely shadowy process and we need assurances from ministers that these powers will only be used for public safety and not for political signalling."
Gordon Brown had claimed the operation uncovered a "very big plot" against the UK.
In a statement, Greater Manchester police said: "The 11 men were questioned and the evidence gathered presented to the CPS who advised there was insufficient evidence gathered within the permitted timescales which would have allowed a warrant of further detention to be gathered or charges to be pursued.
"It is not possible to bail people under terrorism legislation so the men were released.
"Public safety is always the police's top priority and all information is fully considered and acted upon appropriately to minimise risk to the public."
In a press conference on the steps of the police headquarters, chief constable Peter Fahy said: "These people are innocent and they walk away … there are constant threats to this country but we totally respect the situation, we respect that they are innocent until proved guilty."
Fahy denied that there had been a dispute with the security services or that bringing the arrests forward by up to 12 hours had disrupted the investigation. He criticised speculation by outsiders, including retired officers, and said: "I have not conducted any speculation. I do not feel embarrassed or humiliated by what we have done because we have carried out our duty. I don't think a mistake has been made at all."
The BBC reported that security services continued to maintain that a terrorist plot had been disrupted by the operation.
Nine of the men are due to be deported after being handed over to the UK Border Agency but it was not immediately clear what would happen to the last two men. One of the 11 is understood to be a British national. The releases came after investigators spent 13 days searching for evidence following the arrests from a number of addresses in Greater Manchester, Liverpool and Lancashire under the Terrorism Act.
The police operation was condemned today by a spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain. Inayat Bunglawala told Radio 4's Today programme: "When these arrests took place in very dramatic circumstances with students being pulled from universities and thrown to the floor, we were told by the prime minister, no less, that this was part of a very big terrorist plot. Clearly there just has not been the evidence produced to substantiate such a plot."
The raids led to the resignation of the country's leading counterterrorism officer, Bob Quick, after he inadvertently allowed details of the operation to be photographed. Before the men had been interviewed the prime minister spoke of how the police had foiled a "very big plot", but as early as last Monday it emerged the government had spoken to Pakistani officials seeking reassurances that if the men were deported they would not be tortured.
The Guardian understands the decision to arrest the suspects on 8 April came after a three-way row between MI5, senior officers in the Metropolitan police and the Greater Manchester police. MI5 was strongly of the opinion that the arrests should wait while more intelligence was gathered. But in an example of the tensions between Whitehall counterterrorism officials and their counterparts in the police, the decision was made to take "executive action" even though the intelligence suggested there was little evidence to charge the suspects.
It is understood anti-terrorist officers in the Met disagreed with their counterparts in Greater Manchester that the arrests should be made. But the concern that there was a threat to the public led to the decision being made to move in.
Investigators had hoped to find something at the suspects' homes. But after initially hunting for, and failing to find, bomb-making equipment, they turned to the computers hoping that some evidence of a plot would turn up. They found nothing substantial.
Despite media reports and the plot being talked up by Brown, there was never any evidence that the suspects had identified targets for an attack.
The arrests came several hours earlier than the police had planned after Quick accidentally allowed a top secret briefing document on the raids, Operation Pathway, to be caught on camera by a photographer outside Downing Street, when he went to brief ministers on the action. The error led to his resignation after politicians condemned the security breach.
Officers from the north-west counterterrorism unit arrested 12 men under the Terrorism Act following the raids on 8 April. Of the 12 men initially arrested, 11 were Pakistani nationals, 10 held student visas and one was British.
A 12th suspect, an 18-year-old, was released without charge and handed to the Border Agency for deportation on 11 April.
The arrests led to claims that the student visa system contained loopholes which allowed abuse by people attempting to enter the country for illegal activities.
The government has admitted that the system is flawed and, two weeks ago, introduced tougher measures designed to root out false applications. At the time of the arrests counterterrorism sources expressed the fear that al-Qaida was using Pakistani students not known to the security services.
Sixty-eight people are currently on trial, or awaiting trial for alleged terrorist offences.
According to the Home Office, from 11 September 2001 to 31 March 2007, 1,228 terror-related arrests were made, excluding Northern Ireland.
Since January 2007, 92 people have been convicted in significant terrorist cases with 47 people pleading guilty.
Filed under
Bob Quick,
bomb,
inadvertent,
Liverpool,
Manchester
by Winter Patriot
on Wednesday, April 22, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
Home Office : Commons statement by the Home Secretary on Operation Pathway
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Commons statement by the Home Secretary on Operation Pathway
Source: Home Office | April 22, 2009
Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, makes Commons statement on the recent arrest of 12 men in the north-west of England under the Terrorism Act 2000.
With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a statement on the 12 arrests which took place in the north-west of England on 8 April under the Terrorism Act 2000.
Those arrests are part of an ongoing and fast-moving police investigation. I am sure that hon. Members will understand, therefore, why I cannot go into detail on the investigation or the individuals involved.
On Wednesday 8 April, the north-west counter-terrorism unit, working with Merseyside police, Greater Manchester police and Lancashire constabulary, arrested 12 men under the Terrorism Act. Of those 12 individuals, 11 remain in custody and have had their detention extended to 22 April. Ten of the individuals are Pakistani nationals and one is a British citizen. The 12th individual, who is believed to be an Afghan, has been transferred to immigration detention. In addition to the arrests, a number of premises have been searched.
The arrests were pre-planned as the result of an ongoing joint police and Security Service investigation. The decision to take action was an operational matter for the police and the Security Service, but the Prime Minister and I were kept fully informed of developments. The priority at all times has been to act to maintain public safety.
The House will also be aware that during the course of Wednesday 8 April, photographs were taken of Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick as he was going to a meeting in Downing street. Mr. Quick was carrying papers that contained sensitive operational detail about the investigation and some of that detail was visible in the photographs. As a result, a decision was made by the police to bring forward the arrests to a few hours earlier than had been originally planned. The fact that these papers were inadvertently made public did not make any difference to the decision to carry out arrests—it simply changed the timing by a matter of hours. Assistant Commissioner Quick offered his resignation to the Metropolitan Police Authority on the following day and it was accepted. I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to him for his work on counter-terrorism and for his many years of service. He has made an enormous personal contribution to making our country a safer place.
I am sure the House will want to join me in thanking all the police forces involved in this operation. They are to be commended for the professional manner in which they carried out the arrests. I would also like to express my thanks to members of the public in the communities most immediately affected by these arrests, including those at educational institutions, for their patience and measured response to events. The police, with support from local authorities and elected representatives, are working closely with local communities to discuss issues or concerns linked to the operation.
Last month, the Government published our revised strategy to counter the threat to this country and to our interests overseas from international terrorism. A key theme in that strategy, Contest, is the need to co-ordinate our work with our international partners. The Prime Minister has already made it very clear that we need to continue to enhance co-operation on counter-terrorism with Pakistan. He has spoken to President Zardari and they have agreed that our two countries must continue to work together as closely as possible to counter this threat.
We are working with the Government of Pakistan to bolster their efforts to build civic society, tackle violent extremism and help build resilience in Pakistani society against radicalisation—just as we seek to do here in the UK. That work includes support for the modernisation of Pakistan’s security apparatus, support for governance and the rule of law, and work to undermine extremist ideology. Our counter-terrorism programme with Pakistan is worth approximately £10 million a year and is our largest such programme. In addition, to help the Government of Pakistan reduce poverty, the UK has doubled its aid programme to £480 million during 2008-11.
The House will understand that I do not wish to compromise an ongoing investigation by discussing the specifics of the case. However, there has been some speculation that the investigation raises wider questions about the criteria for obtaining student visas and about the issuing of licences by the Security Industry Authority. I would like to clarify the position on both those points.
We are currently delivering the biggest reform of border security and the immigration system for a generation. Last year, we completed the roll-out of biometric visas across the world. Fingerprints are checked against counter-terrorism and crime databases, as well as UK Border Agency records. In posts that we have classified as high risk, such as Pakistan, we have a risk-management network that helps to ensure that the right visa decisions are made, for example by working with local authorities to ensure that the qualifications of prospective students are independently verified.
The impact of those changes is demonstrated in the increased refusal rate for visa applications from Pakistan nationals. Under tier 4 of the points-based system, educational institutions that wish to bring in international students for more than six months must now be accredited by an independent body and licensed by the UK Border Agency. There will for some time be a number of students who have continuing leave under the old system. Many of them will be studying at colleges now on the PBS register, but some will not. Over half these students with existing leave will see their leave expire within 12 months; the vast majority within two years; and almost all within three years. Any student who does not bring themselves within the new PBS regime or leave the country when their leave expires will be subject to appropriate enforcement action.
Before the PBS was in place, about 4,000 institutions brought in international students. Now, under the PBS, there are about 1,500 institutions registered to do so. I have asked UKBA to prioritise enforcement activity on institutions: first, on those which applied but have not made it on to the PBS register; and subsequently on the remaining colleges that have brought in international students in the past, but have not applied for a PBS licence. Where there is evidence of criminal activity, we will prosecute. Where colleges have decided that the requirements of our new, tougher regime are too onerous, we will not allow them to bring in international students.
On the issue of Security Industry Authority licences, applicants have to satisfy a number of criteria before a licence can be issued. In particular, nobody is awarded a licence without a criminal record check and without having their right to work in the UK confirmed. I have asked the SIA to conduct an urgent review to look at whether the existing processes need to be strengthened, at the extent to which students, particularly foreign students, apply for SIA licences and, importantly, at whether that has implications for the security checks conducted by the SIA and the advice provided to employers.
The threat level to the United Kingdom from international terrorism is still assessed as “severe”. A terrorist attack is considered highly likely, so I would like to repeat my thanks to the police and the security agencies for their work in relation to this investigation, and for everything that they do to protect this country and the people who live in it from the threat of terrorist attacks. I commend this statement to the House.
Source: Home Office | April 22, 2009
Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, makes Commons statement on the recent arrest of 12 men in the north-west of England under the Terrorism Act 2000.
With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a statement on the 12 arrests which took place in the north-west of England on 8 April under the Terrorism Act 2000.
Those arrests are part of an ongoing and fast-moving police investigation. I am sure that hon. Members will understand, therefore, why I cannot go into detail on the investigation or the individuals involved.
On Wednesday 8 April, the north-west counter-terrorism unit, working with Merseyside police, Greater Manchester police and Lancashire constabulary, arrested 12 men under the Terrorism Act. Of those 12 individuals, 11 remain in custody and have had their detention extended to 22 April. Ten of the individuals are Pakistani nationals and one is a British citizen. The 12th individual, who is believed to be an Afghan, has been transferred to immigration detention. In addition to the arrests, a number of premises have been searched.
The arrests were pre-planned as the result of an ongoing joint police and Security Service investigation. The decision to take action was an operational matter for the police and the Security Service, but the Prime Minister and I were kept fully informed of developments. The priority at all times has been to act to maintain public safety.
The House will also be aware that during the course of Wednesday 8 April, photographs were taken of Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick as he was going to a meeting in Downing street. Mr. Quick was carrying papers that contained sensitive operational detail about the investigation and some of that detail was visible in the photographs. As a result, a decision was made by the police to bring forward the arrests to a few hours earlier than had been originally planned. The fact that these papers were inadvertently made public did not make any difference to the decision to carry out arrests—it simply changed the timing by a matter of hours. Assistant Commissioner Quick offered his resignation to the Metropolitan Police Authority on the following day and it was accepted. I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to him for his work on counter-terrorism and for his many years of service. He has made an enormous personal contribution to making our country a safer place.
I am sure the House will want to join me in thanking all the police forces involved in this operation. They are to be commended for the professional manner in which they carried out the arrests. I would also like to express my thanks to members of the public in the communities most immediately affected by these arrests, including those at educational institutions, for their patience and measured response to events. The police, with support from local authorities and elected representatives, are working closely with local communities to discuss issues or concerns linked to the operation.
Last month, the Government published our revised strategy to counter the threat to this country and to our interests overseas from international terrorism. A key theme in that strategy, Contest, is the need to co-ordinate our work with our international partners. The Prime Minister has already made it very clear that we need to continue to enhance co-operation on counter-terrorism with Pakistan. He has spoken to President Zardari and they have agreed that our two countries must continue to work together as closely as possible to counter this threat.
We are working with the Government of Pakistan to bolster their efforts to build civic society, tackle violent extremism and help build resilience in Pakistani society against radicalisation—just as we seek to do here in the UK. That work includes support for the modernisation of Pakistan’s security apparatus, support for governance and the rule of law, and work to undermine extremist ideology. Our counter-terrorism programme with Pakistan is worth approximately £10 million a year and is our largest such programme. In addition, to help the Government of Pakistan reduce poverty, the UK has doubled its aid programme to £480 million during 2008-11.
The House will understand that I do not wish to compromise an ongoing investigation by discussing the specifics of the case. However, there has been some speculation that the investigation raises wider questions about the criteria for obtaining student visas and about the issuing of licences by the Security Industry Authority. I would like to clarify the position on both those points.
We are currently delivering the biggest reform of border security and the immigration system for a generation. Last year, we completed the roll-out of biometric visas across the world. Fingerprints are checked against counter-terrorism and crime databases, as well as UK Border Agency records. In posts that we have classified as high risk, such as Pakistan, we have a risk-management network that helps to ensure that the right visa decisions are made, for example by working with local authorities to ensure that the qualifications of prospective students are independently verified.
The impact of those changes is demonstrated in the increased refusal rate for visa applications from Pakistan nationals. Under tier 4 of the points-based system, educational institutions that wish to bring in international students for more than six months must now be accredited by an independent body and licensed by the UK Border Agency. There will for some time be a number of students who have continuing leave under the old system. Many of them will be studying at colleges now on the PBS register, but some will not. Over half these students with existing leave will see their leave expire within 12 months; the vast majority within two years; and almost all within three years. Any student who does not bring themselves within the new PBS regime or leave the country when their leave expires will be subject to appropriate enforcement action.
Before the PBS was in place, about 4,000 institutions brought in international students. Now, under the PBS, there are about 1,500 institutions registered to do so. I have asked UKBA to prioritise enforcement activity on institutions: first, on those which applied but have not made it on to the PBS register; and subsequently on the remaining colleges that have brought in international students in the past, but have not applied for a PBS licence. Where there is evidence of criminal activity, we will prosecute. Where colleges have decided that the requirements of our new, tougher regime are too onerous, we will not allow them to bring in international students.
On the issue of Security Industry Authority licences, applicants have to satisfy a number of criteria before a licence can be issued. In particular, nobody is awarded a licence without a criminal record check and without having their right to work in the UK confirmed. I have asked the SIA to conduct an urgent review to look at whether the existing processes need to be strengthened, at the extent to which students, particularly foreign students, apply for SIA licences and, importantly, at whether that has implications for the security checks conducted by the SIA and the advice provided to employers.
The threat level to the United Kingdom from international terrorism is still assessed as “severe”. A terrorist attack is considered highly likely, so I would like to repeat my thanks to the police and the security agencies for their work in relation to this investigation, and for everything that they do to protect this country and the people who live in it from the threat of terrorist attacks. I commend this statement to the House.
Filed under
Bob Quick,
inadvertent,
Manchester
by Winter Patriot
on Wednesday, April 22, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
AP : Britain frees 12 terror suspects detained in raids
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Britain frees 12 terror suspects detained in raids
By RAPHAEL G. SATTER | April 22, 2009
LONDON (AP) — British police released the last of 12 suspects rounded up in a series of dramatic anti-terror raids earlier this month, failing to charge any of the men, authorities said Wednesday.
The news was an embarrassment for British authorities, including Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who claimed at the time of their arrests that police had disrupted "a very big terrorist plot" that had been monitored "for some time."
The arrests were rushed in part because a police commissioner inadvertently exposed details of the operation to photographers outside the prime minister's office.
Police had to scramble to catch the suspects before they learned of the raid, forgoing their usual dawn raids for a dramatic series of daytime operations across northern England on April 8.
Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, one of the country's top counterterrorism officers, resigned after he inadvertently exposed details of the operation.
One suspect was forced to the ground by gun-toting officers in front of students at the library of Liverpool John Moores University. Most of the men taken into custody were Pakistanis in Britain on student visas.
British officials have said they want to deport all but one of the men on national security grounds, but that may be difficult: A lawyer for three of the men said his clients would fight to continue their education in the U.K., while Islamabad opposes deportation.
"We think they should not be deported if there is no evidence against them and they can't be tried in Britain and if they're innocent," Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokesman Abdul Basit said Wednesday. "Our position is that they should be allowed to continue their studies and live a normal life."
Disquiet within the Muslim community has grown in the two weeks since as media reports suggested that officers were failing to turn up significant evidence of a plot. One suspect was released April 11. Nine more were released Tuesday. The final two were released Wednesday.
Attorney Mohammed Ayub said his clients were in Britain lawfully and that their detention had been "a very serious breach of their human rights." The government was acting in bad faith by seeking to kick the students out of the country, said Inayat Bunglawala, the spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain.
"Instead of releasing them with good grace and making clear a mistake has been made, the government is seeking to deport them citing a very vague national security threat," Bunglawala told BBC radio. "That is a very dishonorable way of proceeding."
Greater Manchester Police, which spearheaded the operation, said it had been extremely complex.
"When it comes to the safety of the public we can't take any chances, we must act on information we receive," Chief Constable Peter Fahy said in a statement.
Associated Press Writer Nahal Toosi in Islamabad, Pakistan, contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
By RAPHAEL G. SATTER | April 22, 2009
LONDON (AP) — British police released the last of 12 suspects rounded up in a series of dramatic anti-terror raids earlier this month, failing to charge any of the men, authorities said Wednesday.
The news was an embarrassment for British authorities, including Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who claimed at the time of their arrests that police had disrupted "a very big terrorist plot" that had been monitored "for some time."
The arrests were rushed in part because a police commissioner inadvertently exposed details of the operation to photographers outside the prime minister's office.
Police had to scramble to catch the suspects before they learned of the raid, forgoing their usual dawn raids for a dramatic series of daytime operations across northern England on April 8.
Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, one of the country's top counterterrorism officers, resigned after he inadvertently exposed details of the operation.
One suspect was forced to the ground by gun-toting officers in front of students at the library of Liverpool John Moores University. Most of the men taken into custody were Pakistanis in Britain on student visas.
British officials have said they want to deport all but one of the men on national security grounds, but that may be difficult: A lawyer for three of the men said his clients would fight to continue their education in the U.K., while Islamabad opposes deportation.
"We think they should not be deported if there is no evidence against them and they can't be tried in Britain and if they're innocent," Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokesman Abdul Basit said Wednesday. "Our position is that they should be allowed to continue their studies and live a normal life."
Disquiet within the Muslim community has grown in the two weeks since as media reports suggested that officers were failing to turn up significant evidence of a plot. One suspect was released April 11. Nine more were released Tuesday. The final two were released Wednesday.
Attorney Mohammed Ayub said his clients were in Britain lawfully and that their detention had been "a very serious breach of their human rights." The government was acting in bad faith by seeking to kick the students out of the country, said Inayat Bunglawala, the spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain.
"Instead of releasing them with good grace and making clear a mistake has been made, the government is seeking to deport them citing a very vague national security threat," Bunglawala told BBC radio. "That is a very dishonorable way of proceeding."
Greater Manchester Police, which spearheaded the operation, said it had been extremely complex.
"When it comes to the safety of the public we can't take any chances, we must act on information we receive," Chief Constable Peter Fahy said in a statement.
Associated Press Writer Nahal Toosi in Islamabad, Pakistan, contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Filed under
Bob Quick,
inadvertent,
Liverpool,
Manchester
by Winter Patriot
on Wednesday, April 22, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
WSJ : Police Fail to Charge U.K. Terror Suspects
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Police Fail to Charge U.K. Terror Suspects
By ALISTAIR MACDONALD and CARRICK MOLLENKAMP | April 22, 2009
LONDON -- British authorities will seek to deport 11 of the 12 men arrested in a recent counterterrorism raid after failing to find enough evidence to charge them, police said Wednesday.
Nine of the 12 were released from police custody Tuesday, and two others were released on Wednesday. One man was released shortly after the raid. In all, 11 of the 12 have been handed to the U.K. Borders Agency, which handles immigration.
The move is a significant disappointment in a case that U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown said reflected a major terrorist threat. The men were arrested earlier this month in a sweeping action across northwest England that rounded up a dozen men -- 11 of them Pakistani nationals, the other a U.K. national of Pakistani descent. Britain's domestic intelligence agency, MI5, worked with local police in executing the raid.
The April 8 raid attracted attention because it was hurriedly carried out after Bob Quick, the top counterterrorism official at the Metropolitan Police Service, inadvertently revealed details of the operation. Mr. Quick was photographed entering No. 10 Downing Street carrying documents that clearly identified key aspects of the operation.
Mr. Quick resigned the next day. Earlier this week, U.K. Home Office Minister Jacqui Smith said that the raid had been brought forward only by a matter of hours by Mr. Quick's mistake.
The decision to now seek deportation of the men could set up a lengthy legal battle if they seek to fight removal to Pakistan.
"This has been an extremely complex investigation that has involved officers working closely with other agencies to gather and examine large amounts of evidence," Chief Constable Peter Fahy, of the Greater Manchester Police said in a statement.
Police said late Tuesday that they are still sorting through aspects of the case. "Officers are continuing to review a large amount of information gathered as part of this investigation. Investigations of this nature are extremely complex," a police spokesman said.
The Home Office said Tuesday that, while the police weren't charging the men, they are seen as a threat to the U.K.
"We are seeking to remove these individuals on grounds of national security," a spokeswoman said. "Where a foreign national poses a threat to this country we will seek to exclude or to deport," the spokeswoman said, adding that the U.K. was working with Pakistani authorities on the deportation.
Write to Alistair MacDonald at alistair.macdonald@wsj.com and Carrick Mollenkamp at carrick.mollenkamp@wsj.com
By ALISTAIR MACDONALD and CARRICK MOLLENKAMP | April 22, 2009
LONDON -- British authorities will seek to deport 11 of the 12 men arrested in a recent counterterrorism raid after failing to find enough evidence to charge them, police said Wednesday.
Nine of the 12 were released from police custody Tuesday, and two others were released on Wednesday. One man was released shortly after the raid. In all, 11 of the 12 have been handed to the U.K. Borders Agency, which handles immigration.
The move is a significant disappointment in a case that U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown said reflected a major terrorist threat. The men were arrested earlier this month in a sweeping action across northwest England that rounded up a dozen men -- 11 of them Pakistani nationals, the other a U.K. national of Pakistani descent. Britain's domestic intelligence agency, MI5, worked with local police in executing the raid.
The April 8 raid attracted attention because it was hurriedly carried out after Bob Quick, the top counterterrorism official at the Metropolitan Police Service, inadvertently revealed details of the operation. Mr. Quick was photographed entering No. 10 Downing Street carrying documents that clearly identified key aspects of the operation.
Mr. Quick resigned the next day. Earlier this week, U.K. Home Office Minister Jacqui Smith said that the raid had been brought forward only by a matter of hours by Mr. Quick's mistake.
The decision to now seek deportation of the men could set up a lengthy legal battle if they seek to fight removal to Pakistan.
"This has been an extremely complex investigation that has involved officers working closely with other agencies to gather and examine large amounts of evidence," Chief Constable Peter Fahy, of the Greater Manchester Police said in a statement.
Police said late Tuesday that they are still sorting through aspects of the case. "Officers are continuing to review a large amount of information gathered as part of this investigation. Investigations of this nature are extremely complex," a police spokesman said.
The Home Office said Tuesday that, while the police weren't charging the men, they are seen as a threat to the U.K.
"We are seeking to remove these individuals on grounds of national security," a spokeswoman said. "Where a foreign national poses a threat to this country we will seek to exclude or to deport," the spokeswoman said, adding that the U.K. was working with Pakistani authorities on the deportation.
Write to Alistair MacDonald at alistair.macdonald@wsj.com and Carrick Mollenkamp at carrick.mollenkamp@wsj.com
Filed under
Bob Quick,
inadvertent,
Manchester
by Winter Patriot
on Wednesday, April 22, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
CBC Britain won't charge 12 arrested in anti-terror sweep
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Britain won't charge 12 arrested in anti-terror sweep
11 Pakistani nationals face deportation
April 22, 2009
Twelve men arrested in a series of anti-terrorist raids involving hundreds of officers across northwest England earlier this month will not face charges due to insufficient evidence, British prosecutors said Wednesday.
Eleven of the arrested men, all of them Pakistani nationals, face deportation and have been transferred into the custody of British immigration authorities.
The men were arrested in a series of raids on April 8 in Manchester, Liverpool and the surrounding area, 320 kilometres northwest of London.
While British officials haven't provided any details about what the men were suspected of doing, Prime Minister Gordon Brown has previously said authorities were on to "a very big terrorist plot."
But British Muslim groups immediately called on the government to admit it had made a mistake with the arrests, and further complicated the case by making prejudicial and "premature" remarks to the media.
Bnayat Bunglawala, of the Muslim Council of Britain, told the BBC the government had been "dishonourable" over the way it had dealt with the men.
"Politics should not be interfering with what is primarily a legal process," he said.
The arrests have strained relations between Pakistan and Britain, and raised questions over Britain's student visa system. Ten out of the 12 arrested were in the country on student visas.
The operation also led to the resignation of Britain's top counterterrorism officer, Bob Quick, after he inadvertently revealed information on the case a day ahead of the raids by being photographed carrying confidential documents to a meeting with the prime minister.
11 Pakistani nationals face deportation
April 22, 2009
Twelve men arrested in a series of anti-terrorist raids involving hundreds of officers across northwest England earlier this month will not face charges due to insufficient evidence, British prosecutors said Wednesday.
Eleven of the arrested men, all of them Pakistani nationals, face deportation and have been transferred into the custody of British immigration authorities.
The men were arrested in a series of raids on April 8 in Manchester, Liverpool and the surrounding area, 320 kilometres northwest of London.
While British officials haven't provided any details about what the men were suspected of doing, Prime Minister Gordon Brown has previously said authorities were on to "a very big terrorist plot."
But British Muslim groups immediately called on the government to admit it had made a mistake with the arrests, and further complicated the case by making prejudicial and "premature" remarks to the media.
Bnayat Bunglawala, of the Muslim Council of Britain, told the BBC the government had been "dishonourable" over the way it had dealt with the men.
"Politics should not be interfering with what is primarily a legal process," he said.
The arrests have strained relations between Pakistan and Britain, and raised questions over Britain's student visa system. Ten out of the 12 arrested were in the country on student visas.
The operation also led to the resignation of Britain's top counterterrorism officer, Bob Quick, after he inadvertently revealed information on the case a day ahead of the raids by being photographed carrying confidential documents to a meeting with the prime minister.
Filed under
Bob Quick,
inadvertent,
Liverpool,
Manchester
by Winter Patriot
on Wednesday, April 22, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
Miami Herald : Britain frees 12 terror suspects detained in raids
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Britain frees 12 terror suspects detained in raids
By RAPHAEL G. SATTER | Associated Press Writer | April 21, 2009
LONDON -- British police released the last of 12 suspects rounded up in a series of dramatic anti-terror raids earlier this month, failing to charge any of the men, authorities said Wednesday.
The news was an embarrassment for British authorities, including Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who claimed at the time of their arrests that police had disrupted "a very big terrorist plot" that had been monitored "for some time."
The arrests were rushed in part because a police commissioner inadvertently exposed details of the operation to a photographer outside the prime minister's office.
Police had to scramble to catch the suspects before they learned of the leak, forgoing their usual dawn raids for a dramatic series of daytime operations across northern England on April 8.
Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, one of the country's top counterterrorism officers, resigned after he inadvertently exposed details of the operation.
One suspect was forced to the ground by gun-toting officers in front of students at Liverpool John Moores University's library. Most of the men taken into custody were Pakistanis in Britain on student visas.
British officials have said they want to deport all but one of the men on national security grounds, but that may be difficult. A lawyer for three of the men said his clients would fight to continue their education in the U.K., while Islamabad opposes deportation.
"We think they should not be deported if there is no evidence against them and they can't be tried in Britain and if they're innocent," Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokesman Abdul Basit said Wednesday. "Our position is that they should be allowed to continue their studies and live a normal life."
Disquiet within the British Muslim community has grown in the two weeks since as media reports suggested that officers were failing to turn up significant evidence of a plot. One suspect was released April 11. Nine more were released Tuesday. The final two were released Wednesday.
Attorney Mohammed Ayub said his clients were in Britain lawfully and that their detention had been "a very serious breach of their human rights." The Muslim Council of Britain, an umbrella group for U.K. Muslim organizations, said the government was acting in bad faith by seeking to expel the students.
"Instead of releasing them with good grace and making clear a mistake has been made, the government is seeking to deport them citing a very vague national security threat," council spokesman Inayat Bunglawala told BBC radio. "That is a very dishonorable way of proceeding."
In Pakistan, the father of one of the suspects pleaded with British authorities to let his son stay in the country for another three months so he could receive his MBA.
"If they could not find any wrongdoing on their part then why should they be deported?" Haji Hazrat Ali, the father of Mohammed Ramzan, told The Associated Press.
---
Associated Press Writer Nahal Toosi in Islamabad, Pakistan and Ishtiaq Mahsud in Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan contributed to this report.
By RAPHAEL G. SATTER | Associated Press Writer | April 21, 2009
LONDON -- British police released the last of 12 suspects rounded up in a series of dramatic anti-terror raids earlier this month, failing to charge any of the men, authorities said Wednesday.
The news was an embarrassment for British authorities, including Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who claimed at the time of their arrests that police had disrupted "a very big terrorist plot" that had been monitored "for some time."
The arrests were rushed in part because a police commissioner inadvertently exposed details of the operation to a photographer outside the prime minister's office.
Police had to scramble to catch the suspects before they learned of the leak, forgoing their usual dawn raids for a dramatic series of daytime operations across northern England on April 8.
Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, one of the country's top counterterrorism officers, resigned after he inadvertently exposed details of the operation.
One suspect was forced to the ground by gun-toting officers in front of students at Liverpool John Moores University's library. Most of the men taken into custody were Pakistanis in Britain on student visas.
British officials have said they want to deport all but one of the men on national security grounds, but that may be difficult. A lawyer for three of the men said his clients would fight to continue their education in the U.K., while Islamabad opposes deportation.
"We think they should not be deported if there is no evidence against them and they can't be tried in Britain and if they're innocent," Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokesman Abdul Basit said Wednesday. "Our position is that they should be allowed to continue their studies and live a normal life."
Disquiet within the British Muslim community has grown in the two weeks since as media reports suggested that officers were failing to turn up significant evidence of a plot. One suspect was released April 11. Nine more were released Tuesday. The final two were released Wednesday.
Attorney Mohammed Ayub said his clients were in Britain lawfully and that their detention had been "a very serious breach of their human rights." The Muslim Council of Britain, an umbrella group for U.K. Muslim organizations, said the government was acting in bad faith by seeking to expel the students.
"Instead of releasing them with good grace and making clear a mistake has been made, the government is seeking to deport them citing a very vague national security threat," council spokesman Inayat Bunglawala told BBC radio. "That is a very dishonorable way of proceeding."
In Pakistan, the father of one of the suspects pleaded with British authorities to let his son stay in the country for another three months so he could receive his MBA.
"If they could not find any wrongdoing on their part then why should they be deported?" Haji Hazrat Ali, the father of Mohammed Ramzan, told The Associated Press.
---
Associated Press Writer Nahal Toosi in Islamabad, Pakistan and Ishtiaq Mahsud in Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan contributed to this report.
Filed under
Bob Quick,
inadvertent,
Liverpool
by Winter Patriot
on Wednesday, April 22, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
Sky News : Police Release Last Two Terror Suspects
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Police Release Last Two Terror Suspects
April 22, 2009
The final two suspects held during anti-terror raids in north west England have been released without charge, Greater Manchester Police have said.
Earlier the lawyer for some of the 10 men already freed told Sky News he wants an independent inquiry into the raids.
A total of 12 men - all Pakistani nationals - were detained in swoops across Greater Manchester, Liverpool and Lancashire two weeks ago.
They were suspected of being involved in a bomb plot and are now facing deportation.
In a statement, Greater Manchester Police said the men were released after the Crown Prosecution Service advised there was not enough evidence to charge them.
The raids were brought forward after Britain's top anti-terror officer inadvertently showed details of the operation to the media.
Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick was photographed in Downing Street carrying documents, clearly marked "secret", about an ongoing police investigation.
All the suspects, aged 18 to 38, have been released into the custody of the UK Borders Agency (UKBA).
The Government has said it wants to deport them, even though they have not been charged with any offences.
A Home Office spokesman said: "We are seeking to remove these individuals on grounds of national security."
But lawyer Mohammed Ayub, who acts for three of the men, has described their arrests and detention as a "very serious breach of their human rights".
He told Sky News:"What I would like to see happen is an independent inquiry into this operation and I don't say this lightly.
"Our clients have no criminal history, they were here lawfully on student visas and all were pursuing their studies and working part-time. Our clients are neither extremists nor terrorists."
Mr Ayub, of Chambers Solicitors, Bradford, insisted his clients should be allowed to "complete the studies they came here for" and said he intended to challenge the deportation orders.
He added: "As a minimum, our clients are entitled to an unreserved apology and no further action should be taken against them."
April 22, 2009
The final two suspects held during anti-terror raids in north west England have been released without charge, Greater Manchester Police have said.
Earlier the lawyer for some of the 10 men already freed told Sky News he wants an independent inquiry into the raids.
A total of 12 men - all Pakistani nationals - were detained in swoops across Greater Manchester, Liverpool and Lancashire two weeks ago.
They were suspected of being involved in a bomb plot and are now facing deportation.
In a statement, Greater Manchester Police said the men were released after the Crown Prosecution Service advised there was not enough evidence to charge them.
The raids were brought forward after Britain's top anti-terror officer inadvertently showed details of the operation to the media.
Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick was photographed in Downing Street carrying documents, clearly marked "secret", about an ongoing police investigation.
All the suspects, aged 18 to 38, have been released into the custody of the UK Borders Agency (UKBA).
The Government has said it wants to deport them, even though they have not been charged with any offences.
A Home Office spokesman said: "We are seeking to remove these individuals on grounds of national security."
But lawyer Mohammed Ayub, who acts for three of the men, has described their arrests and detention as a "very serious breach of their human rights".
He told Sky News:"What I would like to see happen is an independent inquiry into this operation and I don't say this lightly.
"Our clients have no criminal history, they were here lawfully on student visas and all were pursuing their studies and working part-time. Our clients are neither extremists nor terrorists."
Mr Ayub, of Chambers Solicitors, Bradford, insisted his clients should be allowed to "complete the studies they came here for" and said he intended to challenge the deportation orders.
He added: "As a minimum, our clients are entitled to an unreserved apology and no further action should be taken against them."
Filed under
Bob Quick,
bomb,
inadvertent,
Liverpool,
Manchester
by Winter Patriot
on Wednesday, April 22, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
Frontier India : Disruption vs. Prosecution and the Manchester Plot
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Disruption vs. Prosecution and the Manchester Plot
By Fred Burton and Scott Stewart, STRATFOR | April 22, 2009
On April 8, British authorities mounted a series of raids in Merseyside, Manchester and Lancashire that resulted in the arrest of 12 men suspected of being involved in a plot to conduct attacks over the Easter holiday weekend. In a press conference the following day, Prime Minister Gordon Brown noted that the men arrested were allegedly involved in “a very big terrorist plot.” British authorities have alleged that those arrested sought to conduct suicide bombing attacks against a list of soft targets that included shopping centers, a train station and a nightclub.
The searches and arrests targeting the suspects purportedly involved in the plot, which was dubbed Operation Pathway, had to be accelerated after Bob Quick, the assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police in charge of terrorism investigations, inadvertently allowed reporters to see a classified document pertaining to the operation as he was entering 10 Downing Street to brief Brown and Home Secretary Jacqui Smith on April 8. An embarrassed Quick resigned April 9 over the gaffe.
In spite of the leak, the British authorities were successful in detaining all of the targeted suspects, though the authorities have reportedly not been able to recover explosive material or other bomb-making evidence they were seeking. British authorities arrested 12 suspects, 11 of whom were Pakistani citizens. Smith told British Parliament on April 20 that all 11 of the Pakistani nationals entered the United Kingdom on student visas. The youngest of the Pakistani suspects, who is reportedly still a teenager, was remanded to the custody of British immigration authorities to face deportation proceedings April 9. The rest of the 11 suspects were released by British authorities April 21, though ten reportedly were placed in the custody of immigration officials.
Many of the specific details of the plot have not yet come out, and due to the sensitive nature of the intelligence sources and methods involved in these types of investigations, more details may never be fully divulged now that there will be no criminal trial. However, when viewed in the historical and tactical context of other terror plots and attacks (in the United Kingdom and elsewhere), there are some very interesting conclusions that can be drawn from this series of events and the few facts that have been released to the public so far.
This case also highlights the tension that exists within the counterterrorism community between advocates of strategies to disrupt terrorist attacks and those who want to ensure that terror suspects can be convicted in a court of law.
Targets
Among of the most significant things that have come to light so far regarding the thwarted plot are the alleged targets. According to press reports, the British MI5 surveillance teams assigned to monitor the activities of the purported plotters observed some of them videotaping themselves outside of the Arndale and Trafford shopping centers in Manchester, as well as at St. Ann’s Square, which lies in the center of Manchester’s main shopping district. Other reports suggest that the plotters had also conducted surveillance of Manchester’s Piccadilly train station, an intercity train station that is one of the busiest in the United Kingdom outside London, and Manchester’s Birdcage nightclub.
These targets are significant for several reasons. First, they are all soft targets — that is, targets with very little security. As STRATFOR has pointed out for several years now, since counterterrorism efforts have been stepped up in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, and as the tactical capability of groups like al Qaeda has been degraded, jihadist operatives have had less success targeting hardened targets and have turned instead to striking soft targets.
While authorities have moved to protect high-value targets, there simply are far too many potential targets to protect them all. Governments are stretched thin just trying to protect important government buildings, bridges, dams, nuclear power plants, airports and mass-transit systems in their jurisdiction. The reality on the ground is that there are not nearly enough resources to protect them all, much less every potential location where people concentrate in large groups — like shopping centers and nightclubs. This means that some targets are unprotected and are therefore, by definition, soft.
The selection of soft targets in this case indicates that the alleged Manchester plotters did not possess the operational capability to strike more strategic, high-value targets. While attacks against soft targets can be tragic and quite bloody, they will not have the same effect as a successful attack on high-value targets such as Parliament, the London Stock Exchange or a nuclear power station.
It is also very interesting that the plotters were purportedly looking to hit soft targets in Manchester and not soft targets in London. London, as the capital and a city that has been the center of several plots and attacks, is generally on a higher alert than the rest of the country and therefore would likely be seen as more difficult to target. Additionally, many of the suspects lived in the Manchester area, and as we have previously discussed, grassroots operatives, who are not as well-trained as their transnational brethren, tend to “think globally and act locally,” meaning that they tend to plan their attacks in familiar places where they are comfortable operating, rather than in strange and potentially more hostile environment.
In addition to targeting locations like shopping centers and the train station, where there were expected to be large crowds over the holiday weekend, the alleged plotters also apparently looked at the Birdcage nightclub, an establishment that is famous for its “flamboyant and spectacular” shows featuring female impersonators. This is a location the alleged plotters likely considered a symbol of Western decadence (like establishments that serve alcohol in Muslim countries).
Flawed Tradecraft
As noted above, the alleged plotters had been under surveillance by MI5. This indicates that their operational security had been compromised, either via human or technical means. Furthermore, the suspects did not appear to possess any surveillance detection capability — or even much situational awareness — as they went out into Manchester to conduct pre-operational surveillance of potential targets while under government surveillance themselves. Furthermore, the suspects’ surveillance techniques appear to have been very rudimentary in that they lacked both cover for action and cover for status while conducting their surveillance operations.
This aspect of the investigation reinforces two very important points that STRATFOR has been making for some time now. First, most militant groups do not provide very good surveillance training and as a result, poor surveillance tradecraft has long proven to be an Achilles’ heel for militants. Second, because of this weakness, countersurveillance operations can be very effective at catching militant operatives when they are most vulnerable — during the surveillance phase of the terrorist attack cycle.
Media reports indicated that during Operation Pathway, British authorities intercepted a series of Internet exchanges between the suspects suggested a terror strike was imminent. Furthermore, among the locations raided April 8 was the Cyber Net Cafe in Cheetham Hill, an establishment where British authorities observed the suspects using computers to communicate. Not only is this electronic surveillance significant in that it allowed the authorities to surmise the approximate timing of the attack, but perhaps just as important, this ability to monitor the suspects’ communications will allow the authorities to identify other militants in the United Kingdom and beyond.
Indeed, in several previous cases related to the United Kingdom, such as the investigations involving the U.S. arrest of Mohammed Junaid Babar and the U.K. arrest of Younis Tsouli, authorities were able to use communications from militant suspects to identify and roll up militant cells in other countries. Therefore, we will not be at all surprised to hear at some point in the future that British authorities were be able use the communications of the recently arrested suspects to tip off authorities in the United States, Canada, other European countries or elsewhere about the militant activities of people the suspects were in contact with.
Links to Pakistan
And speaking of elsewhere, as noted above, 11 of the arrested suspects were Pakistani nationals who entered the U.K. on student visas. At this point it is not exactly clear if the British believe the 11 suspects were radical militants specifically sent to the United Kingdom to conduct attacks or if they arrived without malicious intent and were then radicalized in the Petri dish of Islamist extremism that so rapidly replicates inside the British Muslim community — what we have come to refer to as Londonistan.
Many British lawmakers and media reports have made a huge issue out of the fact that 11 of the alleged plotters entered the United Kingdom on student visas, but even if the suspects were radicals who used student visas as a way to enter the United Kingdom, this is by no means a new tactic as some are reporting. STRATFOR has long discussed the use of student visas, bogus political asylum claims and other forms of immigration fraud that have commonly been used by militants. In fact, there have been numerous prior examples of jihadist operatives using student visas, such as the following:
* While Sept. 11 hijackers Mohamed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi initially entered the United States on tourist visas, they were approved for M-1 student visas shortly before carrying out their attacks.
* Youssef Samir Megahed, who was arrested in possession of an improvised explosive device (IED) in August 2007 and later sentenced to a 15-year prison sentence, was a Kuwaiti engineering student who entered the United States on a student visa.
* Mohammed Aatique, a convicted member of the “Virginia Jihad Network” who was sentenced to 10 years in prison for conspiracy and weapons violations, also entered the United States from Pakistan as an engineering student.
In some ways, connections between the alleged plotters and militant groups in Pakistan such as al Qaeda or the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) would be more analytically significant than if they turn out to be grassroots operatives. The operational security, skills and terrorist tradecraft exhibited by the plotters are about what one would expect to see in a grassroots militant organization. This level of sophistication is, however, far less than one would expect from a transnational organization. Therefore, if this was an al Qaeda operation, it shows how far the group has fallen in the past eight years. If it was the TTP, it means that our previous estimate of their operational ability outside of Pakistan was fairly accurate.
Lack of Evidence
To date, the British authorities have not been able to find the explosive material and IED components they were expecting to find. This might mean that the materials may still be hidden somewhere and could be used in a future attack. It is also quite possible, and perhaps more likely, that this lack of evidence is an indication that the plot was not quite as far along as the British authorities believed. Perhaps the references the suspects allegedly made to launching the attack on a bank holiday pertained to a holiday later in the year.
While the plot as described by the British authorities would not have been a significant, strategic threat to the United Kingdom, it could have been quite deadly and could very well have surpassed the July 7, 2005, attacks in terms of final body count. Because of this potential destruction, it is quite possible that the British government decided to err on the side of disruption rather than on the side of prosecution. This is something we have seen in the investigation of several other plots in recent years in the United Kingdom and elsewhere, perhaps most notably in the August 2006 Heathrow plot, in which a cell of operatives was preparing to bomb a series of trans-Atlantic airline flights using liquid explosives.
It is much more difficult to obtain a conviction for a conspiracy to commit an act of terrorism than it is to obtain a conviction for an attack that was successfully conducted. Once the attack is executed, there is no longer much room to wrangle in court over things such as intent or capability. Governments also frequently know things via intelligence they cannot prove to the standards required for a conviction in a court of law.
This was seen in the Heathrow case, where only three of the eight suspects were convicted of the main charges during that trial, which ended in September 2008. (The other five suspects had pled guilty to lesser charges.) During that case there was reportedly some tension between the U.S. and British authorities over when to wrap up the Heathrow plotters — some of the British apparently wanted to wait a while longer to secure more damning evidence, while the Americans were reportedly more interested in ensuring that the plot was disrupted than they were in obtaining convictions. It is likely the same dynamic was at play during the investigation of the Manchester case.
Although Quick’s disclosure did hasten the launch of Operation Pathway by a few hours, it did not significantly alter the timing of the investigation — the British authorities were preparing to execute an array of searches and arrests. From an ethical standpoint (and, not insignificantly in this day and age, a political aspect) it is deemed better by many to disrupt a plot early and risk the terror suspects being acquitted than it is to accidentally allow them to conduct an attack while waiting to gather the evidence required for an ironclad court case. Disruption can have an impact on the success of prosecutions, but in the eyes of a growing number of policymakers, that impact is offset by the lives it saves.
By Fred Burton and Scott Stewart, STRATFOR | April 22, 2009
On April 8, British authorities mounted a series of raids in Merseyside, Manchester and Lancashire that resulted in the arrest of 12 men suspected of being involved in a plot to conduct attacks over the Easter holiday weekend. In a press conference the following day, Prime Minister Gordon Brown noted that the men arrested were allegedly involved in “a very big terrorist plot.” British authorities have alleged that those arrested sought to conduct suicide bombing attacks against a list of soft targets that included shopping centers, a train station and a nightclub.
The searches and arrests targeting the suspects purportedly involved in the plot, which was dubbed Operation Pathway, had to be accelerated after Bob Quick, the assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police in charge of terrorism investigations, inadvertently allowed reporters to see a classified document pertaining to the operation as he was entering 10 Downing Street to brief Brown and Home Secretary Jacqui Smith on April 8. An embarrassed Quick resigned April 9 over the gaffe.
In spite of the leak, the British authorities were successful in detaining all of the targeted suspects, though the authorities have reportedly not been able to recover explosive material or other bomb-making evidence they were seeking. British authorities arrested 12 suspects, 11 of whom were Pakistani citizens. Smith told British Parliament on April 20 that all 11 of the Pakistani nationals entered the United Kingdom on student visas. The youngest of the Pakistani suspects, who is reportedly still a teenager, was remanded to the custody of British immigration authorities to face deportation proceedings April 9. The rest of the 11 suspects were released by British authorities April 21, though ten reportedly were placed in the custody of immigration officials.
Many of the specific details of the plot have not yet come out, and due to the sensitive nature of the intelligence sources and methods involved in these types of investigations, more details may never be fully divulged now that there will be no criminal trial. However, when viewed in the historical and tactical context of other terror plots and attacks (in the United Kingdom and elsewhere), there are some very interesting conclusions that can be drawn from this series of events and the few facts that have been released to the public so far.
This case also highlights the tension that exists within the counterterrorism community between advocates of strategies to disrupt terrorist attacks and those who want to ensure that terror suspects can be convicted in a court of law.
Targets
Among of the most significant things that have come to light so far regarding the thwarted plot are the alleged targets. According to press reports, the British MI5 surveillance teams assigned to monitor the activities of the purported plotters observed some of them videotaping themselves outside of the Arndale and Trafford shopping centers in Manchester, as well as at St. Ann’s Square, which lies in the center of Manchester’s main shopping district. Other reports suggest that the plotters had also conducted surveillance of Manchester’s Piccadilly train station, an intercity train station that is one of the busiest in the United Kingdom outside London, and Manchester’s Birdcage nightclub.
These targets are significant for several reasons. First, they are all soft targets — that is, targets with very little security. As STRATFOR has pointed out for several years now, since counterterrorism efforts have been stepped up in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, and as the tactical capability of groups like al Qaeda has been degraded, jihadist operatives have had less success targeting hardened targets and have turned instead to striking soft targets.
While authorities have moved to protect high-value targets, there simply are far too many potential targets to protect them all. Governments are stretched thin just trying to protect important government buildings, bridges, dams, nuclear power plants, airports and mass-transit systems in their jurisdiction. The reality on the ground is that there are not nearly enough resources to protect them all, much less every potential location where people concentrate in large groups — like shopping centers and nightclubs. This means that some targets are unprotected and are therefore, by definition, soft.
The selection of soft targets in this case indicates that the alleged Manchester plotters did not possess the operational capability to strike more strategic, high-value targets. While attacks against soft targets can be tragic and quite bloody, they will not have the same effect as a successful attack on high-value targets such as Parliament, the London Stock Exchange or a nuclear power station.
It is also very interesting that the plotters were purportedly looking to hit soft targets in Manchester and not soft targets in London. London, as the capital and a city that has been the center of several plots and attacks, is generally on a higher alert than the rest of the country and therefore would likely be seen as more difficult to target. Additionally, many of the suspects lived in the Manchester area, and as we have previously discussed, grassroots operatives, who are not as well-trained as their transnational brethren, tend to “think globally and act locally,” meaning that they tend to plan their attacks in familiar places where they are comfortable operating, rather than in strange and potentially more hostile environment.
In addition to targeting locations like shopping centers and the train station, where there were expected to be large crowds over the holiday weekend, the alleged plotters also apparently looked at the Birdcage nightclub, an establishment that is famous for its “flamboyant and spectacular” shows featuring female impersonators. This is a location the alleged plotters likely considered a symbol of Western decadence (like establishments that serve alcohol in Muslim countries).
Flawed Tradecraft
As noted above, the alleged plotters had been under surveillance by MI5. This indicates that their operational security had been compromised, either via human or technical means. Furthermore, the suspects did not appear to possess any surveillance detection capability — or even much situational awareness — as they went out into Manchester to conduct pre-operational surveillance of potential targets while under government surveillance themselves. Furthermore, the suspects’ surveillance techniques appear to have been very rudimentary in that they lacked both cover for action and cover for status while conducting their surveillance operations.
This aspect of the investigation reinforces two very important points that STRATFOR has been making for some time now. First, most militant groups do not provide very good surveillance training and as a result, poor surveillance tradecraft has long proven to be an Achilles’ heel for militants. Second, because of this weakness, countersurveillance operations can be very effective at catching militant operatives when they are most vulnerable — during the surveillance phase of the terrorist attack cycle.
Media reports indicated that during Operation Pathway, British authorities intercepted a series of Internet exchanges between the suspects suggested a terror strike was imminent. Furthermore, among the locations raided April 8 was the Cyber Net Cafe in Cheetham Hill, an establishment where British authorities observed the suspects using computers to communicate. Not only is this electronic surveillance significant in that it allowed the authorities to surmise the approximate timing of the attack, but perhaps just as important, this ability to monitor the suspects’ communications will allow the authorities to identify other militants in the United Kingdom and beyond.
Indeed, in several previous cases related to the United Kingdom, such as the investigations involving the U.S. arrest of Mohammed Junaid Babar and the U.K. arrest of Younis Tsouli, authorities were able to use communications from militant suspects to identify and roll up militant cells in other countries. Therefore, we will not be at all surprised to hear at some point in the future that British authorities were be able use the communications of the recently arrested suspects to tip off authorities in the United States, Canada, other European countries or elsewhere about the militant activities of people the suspects were in contact with.
Links to Pakistan
And speaking of elsewhere, as noted above, 11 of the arrested suspects were Pakistani nationals who entered the U.K. on student visas. At this point it is not exactly clear if the British believe the 11 suspects were radical militants specifically sent to the United Kingdom to conduct attacks or if they arrived without malicious intent and were then radicalized in the Petri dish of Islamist extremism that so rapidly replicates inside the British Muslim community — what we have come to refer to as Londonistan.
Many British lawmakers and media reports have made a huge issue out of the fact that 11 of the alleged plotters entered the United Kingdom on student visas, but even if the suspects were radicals who used student visas as a way to enter the United Kingdom, this is by no means a new tactic as some are reporting. STRATFOR has long discussed the use of student visas, bogus political asylum claims and other forms of immigration fraud that have commonly been used by militants. In fact, there have been numerous prior examples of jihadist operatives using student visas, such as the following:
* While Sept. 11 hijackers Mohamed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi initially entered the United States on tourist visas, they were approved for M-1 student visas shortly before carrying out their attacks.
* Youssef Samir Megahed, who was arrested in possession of an improvised explosive device (IED) in August 2007 and later sentenced to a 15-year prison sentence, was a Kuwaiti engineering student who entered the United States on a student visa.
* Mohammed Aatique, a convicted member of the “Virginia Jihad Network” who was sentenced to 10 years in prison for conspiracy and weapons violations, also entered the United States from Pakistan as an engineering student.
In some ways, connections between the alleged plotters and militant groups in Pakistan such as al Qaeda or the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) would be more analytically significant than if they turn out to be grassroots operatives. The operational security, skills and terrorist tradecraft exhibited by the plotters are about what one would expect to see in a grassroots militant organization. This level of sophistication is, however, far less than one would expect from a transnational organization. Therefore, if this was an al Qaeda operation, it shows how far the group has fallen in the past eight years. If it was the TTP, it means that our previous estimate of their operational ability outside of Pakistan was fairly accurate.
Lack of Evidence
To date, the British authorities have not been able to find the explosive material and IED components they were expecting to find. This might mean that the materials may still be hidden somewhere and could be used in a future attack. It is also quite possible, and perhaps more likely, that this lack of evidence is an indication that the plot was not quite as far along as the British authorities believed. Perhaps the references the suspects allegedly made to launching the attack on a bank holiday pertained to a holiday later in the year.
While the plot as described by the British authorities would not have been a significant, strategic threat to the United Kingdom, it could have been quite deadly and could very well have surpassed the July 7, 2005, attacks in terms of final body count. Because of this potential destruction, it is quite possible that the British government decided to err on the side of disruption rather than on the side of prosecution. This is something we have seen in the investigation of several other plots in recent years in the United Kingdom and elsewhere, perhaps most notably in the August 2006 Heathrow plot, in which a cell of operatives was preparing to bomb a series of trans-Atlantic airline flights using liquid explosives.
It is much more difficult to obtain a conviction for a conspiracy to commit an act of terrorism than it is to obtain a conviction for an attack that was successfully conducted. Once the attack is executed, there is no longer much room to wrangle in court over things such as intent or capability. Governments also frequently know things via intelligence they cannot prove to the standards required for a conviction in a court of law.
This was seen in the Heathrow case, where only three of the eight suspects were convicted of the main charges during that trial, which ended in September 2008. (The other five suspects had pled guilty to lesser charges.) During that case there was reportedly some tension between the U.S. and British authorities over when to wrap up the Heathrow plotters — some of the British apparently wanted to wait a while longer to secure more damning evidence, while the Americans were reportedly more interested in ensuring that the plot was disrupted than they were in obtaining convictions. It is likely the same dynamic was at play during the investigation of the Manchester case.
Although Quick’s disclosure did hasten the launch of Operation Pathway by a few hours, it did not significantly alter the timing of the investigation — the British authorities were preparing to execute an array of searches and arrests. From an ethical standpoint (and, not insignificantly in this day and age, a political aspect) it is deemed better by many to disrupt a plot early and risk the terror suspects being acquitted than it is to accidentally allow them to conduct an attack while waiting to gather the evidence required for an ironclad court case. Disruption can have an impact on the success of prosecutions, but in the eyes of a growing number of policymakers, that impact is offset by the lives it saves.
Filed under
Bob Quick,
bomb,
Easter,
explosives,
inadvertent,
Manchester
by Winter Patriot
on Wednesday, April 22, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
Guardian : All 11 men arrested during anti-terror raids released without charge
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
All 11 men arrested during anti-terror raids released without charge
Police deny that bringing arrests forward disrupted investigation
Sandra Laville, Richard Norton-Taylor and Stephen Bates | April 22, 2009
Greater Manchester Police have released without charge all 11 men arrested a fortnight ago in the north-west of England over an alleged terror plot. The last two men to be released have joined nine others given their freedom last night.
Gordon Brown had claimed the operation uncovered a "very big plot" against the UK.
In a statement, Greater Manchester police said: "The 11 men were questioned and the evidence gathered presented to the CPS who advised there was insufficient evidence gathered within the permitted timescales which would have allowed a warrant of further detention to be gathered or charges to be pursued.
"It is not possible to bail people under terrorism legislation so the men were released.
"Public safety is always the police's top priority and all information is fully considered and acted upon appropriately to minimise risk to the public."
In a press conference on the steps of the police headquarters, chief constable Peter Fahy said: "These people are innocent and they walk away … there are constant threats to this country but we totally respect the situation, we respect that they are innocent until proved guilty."
Fahy denied that there had been a dispute with the security services or that bringing the arrests forward by up to 12 hours had disrupted the investigation. He criticised speculation by outsiders, including retired officers, but added: "I have not conducted any speculation. I do not feel embarrassed or humiliated by what we have done because we have carried out our duty. I don't think a mistake has been made at all."
The BBC has reported that security services continue to maintain that a terrorist plot had been disrupted by the operation.
Nine of the men are due to be deported after being handed over to the UK Border Agency but it was not immediately clear what would happen to the last two men. One of the 11 is understood to be a British national. The releases came after investigators spent 13 days searching for evidence following the arrests from a number of addresses in Greater Manchester, Liverpool and Lancashire under the Terrorism Act.
The police operation was condemned today by a spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain. Inayat Bunglawala told Radio 4's Today programme: "When these arrests took place in very dramatic circumstances with students being pulled from universities and thrown to the floor, we were told by the prime minister, no less, that this was part of a very big terrorist plot. Clearly there just has not been the evidence produced to substantiate such a plot.
"We would hope that senior ministers and the prime minister will understand that it is completely unfair to make prejudicial and premature remarks in cases like this.
"It is perfectly understandable that not every arrest the police make will result in charges being brought … that is the nature of this sort of police work. What is unacceptable is for the government to make prejudicial remarks right at the outset.
"Now that we learn that actual evidence cannot be gathered to substantiate any terror plot, instead of releasing them with good grace and making clear a mistake has been made, the government is seeking to deport them, citing a very vague national security threat. That is a very dishonourable way of proceeding."
The raids led to the resignation of the country's leading counter-terrorism officer, Bob Quick, after he inadvertently allowed details of the operation to be photographed. Before the men had been interviewed the prime minister spoke of how the police had foiled a "very big plot", but as early as last Monday it emerged the government had spoken to Pakistani officials seeking reassurances that if the men were deported they would not be tortured.
The Guardian understands the decision to arrest the suspects on 8 April came after a three-way row between MI5, senior officers in the Metropolitan police and the Greater Manchester police. MI5 was strongly of the opinion that the arrests should wait while more intelligence was gathered. But in an example of the tensions between Whitehall counter-terrorism officials and their counterparts in the police, the decision was made to take "executive action" even though the intelligence suggested there was little evidence to charge the suspects.
It is understood anti-terrorist officers in the Met disagreed with their counterparts in Greater Manchester that the arrests should be made. But the concern that there was a threat to the public led to the decision being made to move in.
Investigators had desperately hoped they would find something at the suspects' homes. But after initially hunting for, and failing to find, bomb-making equipment, they turned to the computers with their fingers crossed that some evidence of a plot would turn up. They found nothing substantial.
Despite media reports and the plot being talked up by Brown, there was never any evidence that the suspects had identified targets for an attack.
The arrests came several hours earlier than the police had planned after Quick accidentally allowed a top secret briefing document on the raids, Operation Pathway, to be caught on camera by a photographer outside Downing Street when he went to brief ministers on the action. The error led to his resignation after politicians condemned the security breach.
But although police sources said bringing forward the arrests may have compromised the operation, it was only brought forward by hours, which is unlikely to have substantially reduced the amount of evidence available to investigators.
Greater Manchester police said last night that nine of the men, aged between 22 and 38, had been transferred into the custody of the UK Borders Agency. The Home Office said: "We are seeking to remove these individuals on grounds of national security. The government's highest priority is to protect public safety. Where a foreign national poses a threat to this country we will seek to exclude or to deport, where this is appropriate."
Officers from the north-west counter-terrorism unit arrested 12 men under the Terrorism Act following the raids on 8 April. Of the 12 men initially arrested, 11 are Pakistani nationals, 10 held student visas and one is British.
Greater Manchester police said searches were continuing at a property in Cheetham Hill, Manchester. "Protecting the public is the main focus of the police. These arrests were carried out after a number of UK agencies gathered information that indicated a potential risk to public safety," the force said. A 12th suspect, an 18-year-old, was released without charge and handed to the Border Agency for deportation on 11 April.
The arrests led to claims that the student visa system contained loopholes which allowed abuse by people attempting to enter the country for illegal activities.
The government has admitted that the system is flawed and, two weeks ago, introduced tougher measures designed to root out false applications. At the time of the arrests counter-terrorism sources expressed the fear that al-Qaida was using Pakistani students not known to the security services.
Police deny that bringing arrests forward disrupted investigation
Sandra Laville, Richard Norton-Taylor and Stephen Bates | April 22, 2009
Greater Manchester Police have released without charge all 11 men arrested a fortnight ago in the north-west of England over an alleged terror plot. The last two men to be released have joined nine others given their freedom last night.
Gordon Brown had claimed the operation uncovered a "very big plot" against the UK.
In a statement, Greater Manchester police said: "The 11 men were questioned and the evidence gathered presented to the CPS who advised there was insufficient evidence gathered within the permitted timescales which would have allowed a warrant of further detention to be gathered or charges to be pursued.
"It is not possible to bail people under terrorism legislation so the men were released.
"Public safety is always the police's top priority and all information is fully considered and acted upon appropriately to minimise risk to the public."
In a press conference on the steps of the police headquarters, chief constable Peter Fahy said: "These people are innocent and they walk away … there are constant threats to this country but we totally respect the situation, we respect that they are innocent until proved guilty."
Fahy denied that there had been a dispute with the security services or that bringing the arrests forward by up to 12 hours had disrupted the investigation. He criticised speculation by outsiders, including retired officers, but added: "I have not conducted any speculation. I do not feel embarrassed or humiliated by what we have done because we have carried out our duty. I don't think a mistake has been made at all."
The BBC has reported that security services continue to maintain that a terrorist plot had been disrupted by the operation.
Nine of the men are due to be deported after being handed over to the UK Border Agency but it was not immediately clear what would happen to the last two men. One of the 11 is understood to be a British national. The releases came after investigators spent 13 days searching for evidence following the arrests from a number of addresses in Greater Manchester, Liverpool and Lancashire under the Terrorism Act.
The police operation was condemned today by a spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain. Inayat Bunglawala told Radio 4's Today programme: "When these arrests took place in very dramatic circumstances with students being pulled from universities and thrown to the floor, we were told by the prime minister, no less, that this was part of a very big terrorist plot. Clearly there just has not been the evidence produced to substantiate such a plot.
"We would hope that senior ministers and the prime minister will understand that it is completely unfair to make prejudicial and premature remarks in cases like this.
"It is perfectly understandable that not every arrest the police make will result in charges being brought … that is the nature of this sort of police work. What is unacceptable is for the government to make prejudicial remarks right at the outset.
"Now that we learn that actual evidence cannot be gathered to substantiate any terror plot, instead of releasing them with good grace and making clear a mistake has been made, the government is seeking to deport them, citing a very vague national security threat. That is a very dishonourable way of proceeding."
The raids led to the resignation of the country's leading counter-terrorism officer, Bob Quick, after he inadvertently allowed details of the operation to be photographed. Before the men had been interviewed the prime minister spoke of how the police had foiled a "very big plot", but as early as last Monday it emerged the government had spoken to Pakistani officials seeking reassurances that if the men were deported they would not be tortured.
The Guardian understands the decision to arrest the suspects on 8 April came after a three-way row between MI5, senior officers in the Metropolitan police and the Greater Manchester police. MI5 was strongly of the opinion that the arrests should wait while more intelligence was gathered. But in an example of the tensions between Whitehall counter-terrorism officials and their counterparts in the police, the decision was made to take "executive action" even though the intelligence suggested there was little evidence to charge the suspects.
It is understood anti-terrorist officers in the Met disagreed with their counterparts in Greater Manchester that the arrests should be made. But the concern that there was a threat to the public led to the decision being made to move in.
Investigators had desperately hoped they would find something at the suspects' homes. But after initially hunting for, and failing to find, bomb-making equipment, they turned to the computers with their fingers crossed that some evidence of a plot would turn up. They found nothing substantial.
Despite media reports and the plot being talked up by Brown, there was never any evidence that the suspects had identified targets for an attack.
The arrests came several hours earlier than the police had planned after Quick accidentally allowed a top secret briefing document on the raids, Operation Pathway, to be caught on camera by a photographer outside Downing Street when he went to brief ministers on the action. The error led to his resignation after politicians condemned the security breach.
But although police sources said bringing forward the arrests may have compromised the operation, it was only brought forward by hours, which is unlikely to have substantially reduced the amount of evidence available to investigators.
Greater Manchester police said last night that nine of the men, aged between 22 and 38, had been transferred into the custody of the UK Borders Agency. The Home Office said: "We are seeking to remove these individuals on grounds of national security. The government's highest priority is to protect public safety. Where a foreign national poses a threat to this country we will seek to exclude or to deport, where this is appropriate."
Officers from the north-west counter-terrorism unit arrested 12 men under the Terrorism Act following the raids on 8 April. Of the 12 men initially arrested, 11 are Pakistani nationals, 10 held student visas and one is British.
Greater Manchester police said searches were continuing at a property in Cheetham Hill, Manchester. "Protecting the public is the main focus of the police. These arrests were carried out after a number of UK agencies gathered information that indicated a potential risk to public safety," the force said. A 12th suspect, an 18-year-old, was released without charge and handed to the Border Agency for deportation on 11 April.
The arrests led to claims that the student visa system contained loopholes which allowed abuse by people attempting to enter the country for illegal activities.
The government has admitted that the system is flawed and, two weeks ago, introduced tougher measures designed to root out false applications. At the time of the arrests counter-terrorism sources expressed the fear that al-Qaida was using Pakistani students not known to the security services.
Filed under
Bob Quick,
bomb,
inadvertent,
Liverpool,
Manchester
by Winter Patriot
on Wednesday, April 22, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
Daily Express : MI5’S Grannies Fight al Qaeda
Sunday, April 19, 2009
MI5’S GRANNIES FIGHT AL QAEDA
MI5 feared a shopping area in Manchester was a prime target
By Gordon Thomas | April 19, 2009
MI5 used some astonishing new weapons in its action against suspected terrorists in the north of England last week.
Playing a leading role were teams of women who kept an eye on the suspects during the long investigation into what is believed to be the biggest campaign plotted by Al Qaeda since the London bombings.
Created by the Security Service’s A4 surveillance division, the teams were tested for the first time in the operation, code-named Pathway, which was directed by MI5’s 50-year-old head Jonathan Evans.
They worked in two groups: one, made up of 72 elderly women, the other, young mothers with babies in prams.
Both had undergone a crash course in surveillance techniques.
Some of the elderly women walked the streets of the northern cities where the suspects lived, ostensibly walking their dogs or going shopping.
But miniature recorders hidden in their hair or beneath a headscarf were monitored by surveillance vans nearby.
These were linked directly to another unit specialising in locating a suspect’s mobile phone by triangulating its signal between two or more transmission masts.
The recorders used by the “granny squad” were also linked to GCHQ, the Government eaves-dropping centre in Cheltenham, Gloucs.
The mothers’ prams were also wired for surveillance. Beneath the real babies was a range of recording equipment that turned the prams into self-contained mobile surveillance units.
A further development by the MI5 scientists was also used. This is a colourless chemical that can be “painted” on a suspect’s clothing.
Another MI5 team, known as BS-1, the Burglar Specialists, break into a suspect’s home and spray the long-lasting chemical on to a shoe, skirt, jacket or trousers, which can then be detected by specially trained dogs.
It was these dogs who pursued the 12 Pakistani students now in custody, as they photographed the smart shopping area in Manchester, which MI5 feared was to be a prime target.
It was the grannies who picked up crucial details of e-mails exchanged by suspects.
During the long operation, which culminated in MI5’s swoop last week, they filed regular reports to a committee of senior MI5 officials based in a sound-proof room in the Security Service’s headquarters in Thames House, London.
It was one of the young mothers pushing her baby through a Manchester street who picked up details of a possible attack over the Easter holidays.
Analysts who studied her tape noticed a reference to the arrest in December last year of suspected Al Qaeda terrorists in Brussels, who were said to be plotting to launch an attack against a two-day summit in the city.
That assault was never launched, however. One possible reason was that it had been replaced by the Manchester plot.
This had all the hallmarks of Rashid Rauf, one of Osama Bin Laden’s top terrorist plotters. He was the mastermind behind the London bombings in July 2005.
Last November, he was reportedly killed by a Hellfire missile fired from a pilotless Predator drone by the CIA on the Pakistan-Afghan border.
A shroud-covered body was removed from the rubble. It was purported to be Rauf, but that is now thought unlikely.
The young mother pushing her pram in Manchester had picked up a snatch of conversation that led GCHQ to believe that Rauf was still alive, probably in Pakistan.
He would almost certainly have pulled off the latest attack except for the undercover operation inadvertently exposed by Bob Quick, the Metropolitan police chief who was Britain’s senior anti-terrorist officer. The blunder cost Quick his job.
It may also have enabled details of Rauf’s plan to escape detection. MI5 boss Evans has told his officers that if Rauf is still alive: “The further we are from his last crime, the closer we are to the next.”
MI5 feared a shopping area in Manchester was a prime target
By Gordon Thomas | April 19, 2009
MI5 used some astonishing new weapons in its action against suspected terrorists in the north of England last week.
Playing a leading role were teams of women who kept an eye on the suspects during the long investigation into what is believed to be the biggest campaign plotted by Al Qaeda since the London bombings.
Created by the Security Service’s A4 surveillance division, the teams were tested for the first time in the operation, code-named Pathway, which was directed by MI5’s 50-year-old head Jonathan Evans.
They worked in two groups: one, made up of 72 elderly women, the other, young mothers with babies in prams.
Both had undergone a crash course in surveillance techniques.
Some of the elderly women walked the streets of the northern cities where the suspects lived, ostensibly walking their dogs or going shopping.
But miniature recorders hidden in their hair or beneath a headscarf were monitored by surveillance vans nearby.
These were linked directly to another unit specialising in locating a suspect’s mobile phone by triangulating its signal between two or more transmission masts.
The recorders used by the “granny squad” were also linked to GCHQ, the Government eaves-dropping centre in Cheltenham, Gloucs.
The mothers’ prams were also wired for surveillance. Beneath the real babies was a range of recording equipment that turned the prams into self-contained mobile surveillance units.
A further development by the MI5 scientists was also used. This is a colourless chemical that can be “painted” on a suspect’s clothing.
Another MI5 team, known as BS-1, the Burglar Specialists, break into a suspect’s home and spray the long-lasting chemical on to a shoe, skirt, jacket or trousers, which can then be detected by specially trained dogs.
It was these dogs who pursued the 12 Pakistani students now in custody, as they photographed the smart shopping area in Manchester, which MI5 feared was to be a prime target.
It was the grannies who picked up crucial details of e-mails exchanged by suspects.
During the long operation, which culminated in MI5’s swoop last week, they filed regular reports to a committee of senior MI5 officials based in a sound-proof room in the Security Service’s headquarters in Thames House, London.
It was one of the young mothers pushing her baby through a Manchester street who picked up details of a possible attack over the Easter holidays.
Analysts who studied her tape noticed a reference to the arrest in December last year of suspected Al Qaeda terrorists in Brussels, who were said to be plotting to launch an attack against a two-day summit in the city.
That assault was never launched, however. One possible reason was that it had been replaced by the Manchester plot.
This had all the hallmarks of Rashid Rauf, one of Osama Bin Laden’s top terrorist plotters. He was the mastermind behind the London bombings in July 2005.
Last November, he was reportedly killed by a Hellfire missile fired from a pilotless Predator drone by the CIA on the Pakistan-Afghan border.
A shroud-covered body was removed from the rubble. It was purported to be Rauf, but that is now thought unlikely.
The young mother pushing her pram in Manchester had picked up a snatch of conversation that led GCHQ to believe that Rauf was still alive, probably in Pakistan.
He would almost certainly have pulled off the latest attack except for the undercover operation inadvertently exposed by Bob Quick, the Metropolitan police chief who was Britain’s senior anti-terrorist officer. The blunder cost Quick his job.
It may also have enabled details of Rauf’s plan to escape detection. MI5 boss Evans has told his officers that if Rauf is still alive: “The further we are from his last crime, the closer we are to the next.”
Filed under
blunder,
Bob Quick,
bomb,
Easter,
inadvertent,
Manchester,
Rashid Rauf
by Winter Patriot
on Sunday, April 19, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
Telegraph : 'Manchester terror plot' suspect pictured for first time
Monday, April 13, 2009
'Manchester terror plot' suspect pictured for first time
The face of one of the Pakistani students arrested as part of an alleged Easter bomb plot to blow up shopping centres in Manchester can be revealed for the first time as it emerged a flat he stayed at is owned by a suspected terrorist financier.
By Duncan Gardham and Aislinn Simpson | April 13, 2009
The picture, obtained by the Daily Telegraph, shows Janas Khan, 25, a student at Hope University in Liverpool who was illegally moonlighting as a security guard.
The company he worked for had provided security for England and Liverpool footballers although Khan was not involved in that side of the business.
He worked as a £6-an hour security guard at building sites around Liverpool until his cousin was deported for alleged visa violations in January.
Khan comes from Peshawar, near Pakistan's border with Afghanistan, where he studied for a degree designed to prepare students for medical school at the Government Superior Science College.
He obtained his passport in September 2006 and is thought to have arranged his student visa and travel to Britain shortly afterwards.
Haroon Khan who employed the arrested man, said: "He is very slight, not a big guy at all. We have a gym here but he never used it.
"He was a very clever lad but a bit of a loner, always looking for attention or company."
Khan resigned from his job but signed on with another company which employed him to act as a security guard at a new Homebase which opened in Clitheroe, Lancashire last week.
The store is close to a chemical plant run by Johnson Matthey and it is suspected the men may have been using their jobs as security guards to scout potential targets.
MI5 observed the men filming themselves outside the Trafford and Arndale shopping centres and St Ann's Square in Manchester and they also visited a number of second-hand car dealerships.
Operation Pathway to arrest the men had to be brought forward by 24 hours last week after Britain's most senior counter-terrorism police officer, Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, inadvertently revealed details of the operation on a piece of paper as he went into Downing Street.
Police suspect the men were sent to Britain as suicide bombers by al-Qaeda planners in Pakistan's tribal areas, not far from Peshawar.
Khan is thought to have stayed at a flat raided in Earle Road in Wavertree, Liverpool.
The property is owned by Mohammed Benhammedi who has an interest in a property firm called Ozlam Properties Ltd.
Benhammedi has been identified by the Americans as an alleged "key financier" for the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which is associated with al-Qaeda, and was arrested in 2002 in Iran for allegedly attempting to enter Afghanistan.
He was arrested in Britain in 2006 for alleged terrorist activity in Iraq but released five months later.
His assets were frozen under a United Nations resolution after he was named by the US Treasury and he is still the subject of an Interpol appeal.
His partner in Ozlam properties, Asaad Shalash, said he had not seen Benhammedi for 18 months.
Mr Shalash arranged the rental of the property in Earle Road to three students, he believed were studying accountancy, one of whom was arrested there on Wednesday.
Khan was arrested at a bedsit where he was staying in Clitheroe along with fellow security guard, Umar Farooq.
Police have been given another week to question 11 men aged between 22 and 41, all but one of who are Pakistani citizens and most of whom arrived using student visas.
An 18-year-old was released without charge but immediately detained by immigration authorities.
Among the others arrested are Abid Naseer, 22, and Hamza Shinwari, another security guard, who both lived in Cheetham Hill, Manchester.
The main tenant where three men were arrested in Cedar Grove, Toxteth in Liverpool was Abdul Wahab Khan, 26, a student.
Searches are continuing at 10 addresses across the north west.
The face of one of the Pakistani students arrested as part of an alleged Easter bomb plot to blow up shopping centres in Manchester can be revealed for the first time as it emerged a flat he stayed at is owned by a suspected terrorist financier.
By Duncan Gardham and Aislinn Simpson | April 13, 2009
The picture, obtained by the Daily Telegraph, shows Janas Khan, 25, a student at Hope University in Liverpool who was illegally moonlighting as a security guard.The company he worked for had provided security for England and Liverpool footballers although Khan was not involved in that side of the business.
He worked as a £6-an hour security guard at building sites around Liverpool until his cousin was deported for alleged visa violations in January.
Khan comes from Peshawar, near Pakistan's border with Afghanistan, where he studied for a degree designed to prepare students for medical school at the Government Superior Science College.
He obtained his passport in September 2006 and is thought to have arranged his student visa and travel to Britain shortly afterwards.
Haroon Khan who employed the arrested man, said: "He is very slight, not a big guy at all. We have a gym here but he never used it.
"He was a very clever lad but a bit of a loner, always looking for attention or company."
Khan resigned from his job but signed on with another company which employed him to act as a security guard at a new Homebase which opened in Clitheroe, Lancashire last week.
The store is close to a chemical plant run by Johnson Matthey and it is suspected the men may have been using their jobs as security guards to scout potential targets.
MI5 observed the men filming themselves outside the Trafford and Arndale shopping centres and St Ann's Square in Manchester and they also visited a number of second-hand car dealerships.
Operation Pathway to arrest the men had to be brought forward by 24 hours last week after Britain's most senior counter-terrorism police officer, Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, inadvertently revealed details of the operation on a piece of paper as he went into Downing Street.
Police suspect the men were sent to Britain as suicide bombers by al-Qaeda planners in Pakistan's tribal areas, not far from Peshawar.
Khan is thought to have stayed at a flat raided in Earle Road in Wavertree, Liverpool.
The property is owned by Mohammed Benhammedi who has an interest in a property firm called Ozlam Properties Ltd.
Benhammedi has been identified by the Americans as an alleged "key financier" for the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which is associated with al-Qaeda, and was arrested in 2002 in Iran for allegedly attempting to enter Afghanistan.
He was arrested in Britain in 2006 for alleged terrorist activity in Iraq but released five months later.
His assets were frozen under a United Nations resolution after he was named by the US Treasury and he is still the subject of an Interpol appeal.
His partner in Ozlam properties, Asaad Shalash, said he had not seen Benhammedi for 18 months.
Mr Shalash arranged the rental of the property in Earle Road to three students, he believed were studying accountancy, one of whom was arrested there on Wednesday.
Khan was arrested at a bedsit where he was staying in Clitheroe along with fellow security guard, Umar Farooq.
Police have been given another week to question 11 men aged between 22 and 41, all but one of who are Pakistani citizens and most of whom arrived using student visas.
An 18-year-old was released without charge but immediately detained by immigration authorities.
Among the others arrested are Abid Naseer, 22, and Hamza Shinwari, another security guard, who both lived in Cheetham Hill, Manchester.
The main tenant where three men were arrested in Cedar Grove, Toxteth in Liverpool was Abdul Wahab Khan, 26, a student.
Searches are continuing at 10 addresses across the north west.
Filed under
Abdul Wahab Khan,
Abid Naseer,
Bob Quick,
bomb,
Easter,
inadvertent,
Janas Khan,
Liverpool,
Manchester
by Winter Patriot
on Monday, April 13, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
Daily Mail : Terror raid house owner's Al Qaeda links
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Terror raid house owner's Al Qaeda links [1st article at the link]
By Alan Rimmer and Daniel Boffey | April 12, 2009
At least one of the men arrested in the counter-terrorist raids this week was living in a property owned by a man on the run for allegedly financing groups working alongside Al Qaeda.
Mohammed Benhammedi, who appears alongside Osama Bin Laden on Interpol’s wanted list, is accused of channelling money to terrorists through his British companies.
A property Benhammedi owns in Liverpool was raided on Wednesday as part of an investigation into what Gordon Brown described as ‘a very big terrorist plot’.
Offlicence
Arrests: This flat, over an off-licence, was raided by police. It is owned by Mohammed Benhammedi who is wanted by Interpol
Witnesses said one man was arrested by police as he entered the £115,000 flat, but it is believed two of the other 11 men detained this week were also tenants in Benhammedi’s property.
Benhammedi is accused by the US Treasury and the United Nations of funding the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, an organisation described as being part of the ‘wider A Qaeda associated movement’ dedicated to jihadi. The group is banned here under terrorism laws.
Yesterday, officers continued to search the property, a three-bedroom flat above an off-licence, as those detained faced further questioning.
An 18-year-old arrested in connection with the plot was released into the custody of the UK Borders Agency, possibly for deportation.
Police have a further seven days to detain the 11 men they still hold, who range in age from 22 to 41, most of whom are believed to have come to Britain from Pakistan on student visas.
Sources have claimed police believe that one of the possible targets for the plot was Manchester’s Piccadilly train station while packed with holiday travellers over the Easter break.
The police operation was rushed forward on Wednesday following a blunder by Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, who inadvertently revealed confidential details of the raids while leaving his car for a Downing Street meeting.
Benhammedi’s flat on Earle Road, in Liverpool’s Wavertree district, was one of ten properties being searched. He bought it with Asaad Shalash in 2004 as part of a business partnership called Ozlam Properties Ltd.
But in 2006, Mr Benhammedi, 42, had his assets and three property firms frozen for his alleged role in financing the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, an organisation that the US Government claims attempted to install a hard-line Islamic state in the African country.
A press release from the US Treasury accused Benhammedi of being a ‘key financier’ of the terrorist group, adding that he was believed to provide funds through three property companies, including Ozlam Properties Ltd.
The statement claimed he had first come to the attention of authorities when he was detained in 2002 by Iranian officials as he attempted to illegally enter Afghanistan.
Benhammedi was subsequently arrested in 2006 in the UK under terrorism legislation for alleged activities in Iraq and was due to be deported.
Last night it was unclear whether Benhammedi had been forced to leave the UK. However, Interpol has appealed for anyone with information on the Libyan-born businessman, who operates under a number of aliases including the westernised name of Ben Hammedi.
Mr Shalash, who was a co-director with Benhammedi in Ozlam Properties, claimed ‘complete innocence’ of any links with terrorism.
He said he first met Benhammedi in 2004 when he was running a rival property firm called Sara Properties.
He said: ‘I was running a company called Ozlam Properties on the same road in Liverpool. We became partners and shared some work, mainly maintenance work and property lets.
‘In about 2006, Mr Hammedi was arrested and I understand he was in custody for about five months on terror charges. As a result of that, his business assets, including his interest in my company, were all frozen by the United Nations. The whole thing ultimately cost me about £180,000.
‘He was a flamboyant character and would drive around in limousines with lots of women. He controlled a property empire of some 300 properties in the Liverpool area. I don’t know whether he is a terrorist or not. But as he was released from custody after being arrested, I assumed he was innocent.
‘The last time I saw Mr Hammedi was about 18 months ago. But to be honest with you, I do not want to know him.’
Mr Shalash, 46, added that the men living in his property had only recently moved in, each paying a month’s rent in advance. He said: ‘The police interviewed me for three hours. They went over all I knew about the men. I told them I knew nothing about them, apart from the fact that they were students.’
This week’s raids caused a diplomatic row between Britain and Pakistan, with Mr Brown calling on Pakistan to do more ‘to root out the terrorist elements in its country’.
By Alan Rimmer and Daniel Boffey | April 12, 2009
At least one of the men arrested in the counter-terrorist raids this week was living in a property owned by a man on the run for allegedly financing groups working alongside Al Qaeda.
Mohammed Benhammedi, who appears alongside Osama Bin Laden on Interpol’s wanted list, is accused of channelling money to terrorists through his British companies.
A property Benhammedi owns in Liverpool was raided on Wednesday as part of an investigation into what Gordon Brown described as ‘a very big terrorist plot’.
Offlicence
Arrests: This flat, over an off-licence, was raided by police. It is owned by Mohammed Benhammedi who is wanted by Interpol
Witnesses said one man was arrested by police as he entered the £115,000 flat, but it is believed two of the other 11 men detained this week were also tenants in Benhammedi’s property.
Benhammedi is accused by the US Treasury and the United Nations of funding the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, an organisation described as being part of the ‘wider A Qaeda associated movement’ dedicated to jihadi. The group is banned here under terrorism laws.
Yesterday, officers continued to search the property, a three-bedroom flat above an off-licence, as those detained faced further questioning.
An 18-year-old arrested in connection with the plot was released into the custody of the UK Borders Agency, possibly for deportation.
Police have a further seven days to detain the 11 men they still hold, who range in age from 22 to 41, most of whom are believed to have come to Britain from Pakistan on student visas.
Sources have claimed police believe that one of the possible targets for the plot was Manchester’s Piccadilly train station while packed with holiday travellers over the Easter break.
The police operation was rushed forward on Wednesday following a blunder by Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, who inadvertently revealed confidential details of the raids while leaving his car for a Downing Street meeting.
Benhammedi’s flat on Earle Road, in Liverpool’s Wavertree district, was one of ten properties being searched. He bought it with Asaad Shalash in 2004 as part of a business partnership called Ozlam Properties Ltd.
But in 2006, Mr Benhammedi, 42, had his assets and three property firms frozen for his alleged role in financing the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, an organisation that the US Government claims attempted to install a hard-line Islamic state in the African country.
A press release from the US Treasury accused Benhammedi of being a ‘key financier’ of the terrorist group, adding that he was believed to provide funds through three property companies, including Ozlam Properties Ltd.
The statement claimed he had first come to the attention of authorities when he was detained in 2002 by Iranian officials as he attempted to illegally enter Afghanistan.
Benhammedi was subsequently arrested in 2006 in the UK under terrorism legislation for alleged activities in Iraq and was due to be deported.
Last night it was unclear whether Benhammedi had been forced to leave the UK. However, Interpol has appealed for anyone with information on the Libyan-born businessman, who operates under a number of aliases including the westernised name of Ben Hammedi.
Mr Shalash, who was a co-director with Benhammedi in Ozlam Properties, claimed ‘complete innocence’ of any links with terrorism.
He said he first met Benhammedi in 2004 when he was running a rival property firm called Sara Properties.
He said: ‘I was running a company called Ozlam Properties on the same road in Liverpool. We became partners and shared some work, mainly maintenance work and property lets.
‘In about 2006, Mr Hammedi was arrested and I understand he was in custody for about five months on terror charges. As a result of that, his business assets, including his interest in my company, were all frozen by the United Nations. The whole thing ultimately cost me about £180,000.
‘He was a flamboyant character and would drive around in limousines with lots of women. He controlled a property empire of some 300 properties in the Liverpool area. I don’t know whether he is a terrorist or not. But as he was released from custody after being arrested, I assumed he was innocent.
‘The last time I saw Mr Hammedi was about 18 months ago. But to be honest with you, I do not want to know him.’
Mr Shalash, 46, added that the men living in his property had only recently moved in, each paying a month’s rent in advance. He said: ‘The police interviewed me for three hours. They went over all I knew about the men. I told them I knew nothing about them, apart from the fact that they were students.’
This week’s raids caused a diplomatic row between Britain and Pakistan, with Mr Brown calling on Pakistan to do more ‘to root out the terrorist elements in its country’.
Filed under
blunder,
Bob Quick,
Easter,
inadvertent,
Liverpool,
Manchester
by Winter Patriot
on Sunday, April 12, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
The Hindu : One of 12 suspects arrested in UK over al-Qaeda plot freed
Sunday, April 12, 2009
One of 12 suspects arrested in UK over al-Qaeda plot freed
April 12, 2009
London (PTI): One of the 12 suspects arrested by the British police over a "very big terrorist plot" linked to al-Qaeda has been released as police quizzed the remaining detainees, most of them Pakistanis.
The 12, including 11 Pakistanis, were arrested in raids across northern England on Wednesday last after a covert surveillance operation against al-Qaeda suspects in Britain was inadvertently revealed by top counter-terrorism expert Bob Quick, who was then forced to resign as Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police.
Police have released one of the 12 detained persons, the media here reported, adding that the others were still being grilled.
Soon after the arrest of the suspects, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown had said that they were held over "a very big terrorist plot".
He also took up the issue of the arrest of the 11 Pakistanis with President Asif Ali Zardari.
April 12, 2009
London (PTI): One of the 12 suspects arrested by the British police over a "very big terrorist plot" linked to al-Qaeda has been released as police quizzed the remaining detainees, most of them Pakistanis.
The 12, including 11 Pakistanis, were arrested in raids across northern England on Wednesday last after a covert surveillance operation against al-Qaeda suspects in Britain was inadvertently revealed by top counter-terrorism expert Bob Quick, who was then forced to resign as Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police.
Police have released one of the 12 detained persons, the media here reported, adding that the others were still being grilled.
Soon after the arrest of the suspects, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown had said that they were held over "a very big terrorist plot".
He also took up the issue of the arrest of the 11 Pakistanis with President Asif Ali Zardari.
Filed under
Bob Quick,
inadvertent
by Winter Patriot
on Sunday, April 12, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
Independent : Raids on 'bomb plotters' fail to unearth explosives
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Raids on 'bomb plotters' fail to unearth explosives
Met's counter-terrorism chief quits after revealing details of operation
By Kim Sengupta, Mark Hughes and Nigel Morris | April 10, 2009
Raids to foil an alleged al-Qa'ida bomb plot, hurriedly brought forward after a blunder by a senior police officer, are yet to uncover any explosives or firearms, according to senior security sources. But further pressure was growing on the government last night after after it emerged that the suspects being questioned today may have exploited lax student visa regulations to enter the UK from Pakistan.
Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, the Metropolitan Police's counter-terrorism chief, resigned yesterday amid the furore which followed his being photographed carrying secret documents about the anti-terrorist mission to a Downing Street briefing.
Although the details on the document were not published in the British media following a prohibitive Ministry of Defence D-Notice, they appeared on an American website. It forced the police to carry out arrests of 12 suspects and searches of 14 addresses in north-west England in broad daylight, hours before they planned to do so.
Police have taken away computers, literature, maps and clothing from the premises they raided, as well as a car, but they have not, so far, found the bomb-making material needed to carry out the supposedly "imminent" multiple attacks by the suspects.
Greater Manchester Police said yesterday that they were continuing to gather evidence. Chief Constable Peter Fahy acknowledged that it was not ideal that the operation had to be moved forward but added that officers were used to dealing with "fast-moving situations".
According to security sources, some of the suspects had been trailed to pubs and nightclubs as well as shopping centres. However, Mr Fahy said: "There is no particular threat against any particular location ... I would like to say I would have no hesitation, or any of my family, in using any of those locations that have been mentioned."
Senior officers are, however, aware that being forced to move prematurely could have damaging consequences for subsequent prosecutions.
Ten of the 12 arrests on Wednesday were carried out between 5pm and 6pm. Two more men were held from just after 10pm. Eleven of the men hold Pakistani nationality and the twelfth is British of Pakistani extraction. At least seven of the men are said to have entered the UK on student visas and four are believed to have links with the city of Karachi.
According to the confidential briefing document, 10 of those arrested were "student visas Pakistan-born nationals": ie Pakistani citizens studying in Britain. Gordon Brown yesterday called on Pakistan to do more to tackle the "increasing" terrorism links the country has with Britain. The Prime Minister said: "One of the lessons we have learned from the past few years is that Pakistan has to do more to root out terrorist elements in its country as well."
He added: "We know that there are links between terrorists in Britain and terrorists in Pakistan. That is an important issue for us to follow through and that's why I will be talking to President Zardari about what Pakistan can do to help us in the future." Mr Brown defended the police operation, saying: "We are dealing with a very big terrorist plot. We must not forget that the police have been successful in carrying out their arrests ... We had to act pre-emptively to ensure the safety of the public."
Bob Quick's resignation came after a meeting with Sir Paul Stephenson and the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, yesterday morning, when it was agreed the officer would stand down. Sources said it was decided that Scotland Yard would make the announcement, but before they could do so, the London mayor Boris Johnson broke the news on Radio 4's Today programme after being told himself at 7.30am. Home Office sources saccused Mr Johnson of trying to make political capital out of the situation.
Later, Mr Quick said in a statement: "I have today offered my resignation in the knowledge that my action could have compromised a major counter-terrorism operation."
Sir Paul Stephenson, the Scotland Yard commissioner, paid tribute to Mr Quick and said John Yates, formerly the assistant commissioner of the serious crime directorate, has replaced him.
The Quick document: Decoded
The operation
Operation Pathway was, as Mr Quick's note makes clear, secret. It had been in the planning for two months and suspects had been under surveillance. As the note details, it was in relation to "suspected AQ attack planning within the UK". AQ refers to al-Qa'ida and the attacks were said to relate to targets in the North-west. Obvious places such as the Arndale shopping centre and Old Trafford football ground have been mentioned, but not confirmed.
The suspects
The briefing sheet refers to 11 subjects, 10 Pakistanis and one British national. In actual fact the raids revealed a further, unexpected, Pakistan-born national who was also arrested on suspicion of terror offences. The men were aged between their mid-teens and 41 years old.
The addresses
The plan, as detailed on Mr Quick's document, was to make arrests at seven addresses; three by Greater Manchester Police, three by officers from Merseyside and one in Lancashire. After the pictures of Mr Quick were taken the operation was brought forward and only six arrests went ahead as planned: two at a house on Galsworthy Avenue, Cheetham Hill, Manchester, three at Cedar Grove, Toxteth and one at a flat on Earle Road, Merseyside. The others were arrested; one at Liverpool John Moores University, two at a Homebase store in Clitheroe, two at a cyber café in Cheetham Hill Road and one in a white van on the M602 motorway.
The plan
The sheet refers to dynamic entry by firearms teams. This simply means that armed officers planned to raid the homes by breaking the doors down. The raids should have taken place sometime between 2am and 6am yesterday morning as opposed to during Wednesday evening. The reason for this is that suspects are at their most vulnerable when tired and unlikely to fight back. It is also likely they would have been asleep at this time and therefore undressed and unlikely to be carrying weapons.
The command structures
The note reveals the names of all of the senior officers in charge of the investigation – names that The Independent had chosen not to report – including the SIO – Senior Investigating Officer and the three Gold commanders – officers who would be in charge of overseeing the operation in each region.
The media strategy
Also mentioned is confirmation that a plan of what details were to be released to the media, and when, was in place. Like the rest of the details, it too was brought forward when a member of the media – photographer Steve Back – pictured Mr Quick with the supposedly private document.
How Boris took 'Today' by surprise
Transcript from the Today programme
Jim Naughtie: "Bob Quick's future seems to be in the balance this morning – what do you make of it?"
David Winnick MP: "It's obviously very disturbing...(but) I don't believe it's a matter for him to resign or be dismissed."
JN: I'm going to interrupt you there because we've got Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, on the line now. Good morning Mr Johnson. What, as far as you know, is happening at Scotland Yard?
Boris Johnson: "I have this morning with great reluctance and sadness as Chairman of the Metropolitan Police Authority accepted Bob Quick's resignation as head of counter-terrorism..."
JN: "David Winnick, you said you didn't think that this was a resigning matter. Mr Quick has obviously taken the view that he couldn't carry on. What do you make of it?"
DW: "It comes as no surprise. Undoubtedly Mr Quick has done very good work in combating terrorism. We shouldn't forget for one moment, whatever may be the controversy over Mr Quick, that Britain does face an ongoing terrorist danger."
Downfall of a man with Tory enemies
Out: Bob Quick
Like his surname, Bob Quick's tenure as Scotland Yard's head of counter-terrorism was brief. Appointed in March 2008, he resigned yesterday after just over a year in the role.
In that year he was dogged by controversy, and was forced to deal with no fewer than three separate scandals in the final six months of his career.
It was in stark contrast to the rapid rise he enjoyed since joining the Metropolitan Police in 1978. He moved quickly through the ranks, working as a uniformed officer and a detective before being appointed as head of the Yard's anti-corruption unit – a role reserved for officers with unblemished reputations.
A 49-year-old with five children, his profile on the Metropolitan Police website, from which he will soon be removed, lists his interests as skiing, motorcycling and walking. It also reveals that he has a masters degree in business administration from Exeter University and diploma in criminology from Cambridge University.
In 2003 he left the Met to join Surrey Police as chief constable, before returning to the capital as Assistant Commissioner in charge of specialist operations last year. He took over from Andy Hayman, who took early retirement in 2007 amid accusations of lavish expenses and questions over his relationship with a female civil servant – accusations that were later proved unfounded.
Mr Quick's problems started in November when he was named as the officer who authorised the controversial arrest of the Conservative MP Damian Green and the raid on his House of Commons office. He was backed by Sir Paul Stephenson, then Acting Commissioner, but a review raised concerns over the way police conducted the investigation.
The incident blotted his copy book enough to ensure that, when he applied for the Yard's top job late last year, he did not even make the shortlist.
After this a Sunday newspaper revealed that Mr Quick's wife ran a car-hire business from their Surrey home. Critics said that the company website, which showed cars parked outside his house, compromised his security. His reaction compounded the scandal when he accused the Conservative Party of running a media smear campaign against him. He later retracted his comments, saying: "I apologise unreservedly for any offence or embarrassment that I have caused."
That aberration appeared to have been forgotten, although police sources say that Mr Quick has rarely been at work since his outburst.
But yesterday Mr Quick made a final error. Stepping out of a car in Downing Street he inadvertently revealed the details of a sensitive terror investigation. He resigned "in the knowledge that my action could have compromised a major counter-terrorism operation", adding that he deeply regretted the disruption he had caused.
A Scotland Yard source said: "I am not surprised he has gone. If a constable or a sergeant had made the same error they would be looking at serious sanctions, perhaps dismissal. It's an incredibly basic error. For someone in his position to do it is unforgivable. You do not have to be an expert in counter-terrorism to know that you should keep sensitive documents hidden."
Rise of the officer who took on Blair
In: John Yates
As one of the most respected police officers at Scotland Yard, John Yates has a track record so impressive it is easy to see why he was the man the Commissioner turned to in yesterday's hour of need.
In 28 years at the Metropolitan Police, Mr Yates has taken on a number of high-profile investigations, with a good deal of success. Since joining the Met in 1981, after being educated at Marlborough College and King's College London, he quickly progressed through the ranks, as a uniformed officer and a detective, and has led investigations into more than 20 murders.
Between 1999 and 2000 he worked as staff officer to the then commissioner Sir Paul – now Lord – Condon during the Macpherson inquiry into the death of Stephen Lawrence. Other high profile cases he has worked on include the Jeffrey Archer perjury investigation, the Who Wants to be a Millionaire? fraud and an internal corruption inquiry which saw six Met detectives jailed for a total of 46 years.
His only setback of note was in 2005 when, as the officer in charge of the cash-for-honours investigation, he failed to bring a single charge despite interviewing 130 people at a cost of £773,177 to the taxpayer.
The one-year case centred on allegations that House of Lords peerages were offered by Labour and Conservative politicians in exchange for donations to their parties. Despite his confidence that he had built a case that would result in a trial, the Crown Prosecution Service did not bring charges. Mr Yates said his officers received "less than full co-operation".
Despite this, he is still seen as a safe pair of hands by the Met. He was the officer chosen to co-ordinate the British response to the Asian tsunami, for which he was awarded the Queen's Police Medal.
And he was the man who travelled to Brazil to apologise to the family of Jean Charles de Menezes, following the Stockwell Tube operation which saw the innocent Brazilian shot dead. He also stood on the steps of the Old Bailey to publicly apologise for mistakes in the Rachel Nickell investigation which saw Colin Stagg wrongly charged and allowed a murder investigation to go unsolved for 18 years.
A favourite of both the rank-and-file officers and the Met hierarchy, Mr Yates, 50, a keen cyclist who is married with children, was many officers' choice to become Sir Paul Stephenson's deputy when he took the top job earlier this year. But, unlike his fellow Northerner, Mr Yates preferred to stay involved in day-to-day policing.
Yesterday he became the third man in as many years, after Andy Hayman and Bob Quick, to fill the role of Assistant Commissioner in charge of specialist operations. The role gives him national responsibility for counter-terrorism.
A police source said it was easy to see why Mr Yates had been chosen for the job. He said: "He is a top man. Anybody who has worked with him will tell you he is as sharp as a tack. You will rarely come across a more professional officer than John Yates.
"Just sitting in a meeting with him is enough to make you realise that he is much sharper than any of the other officers at his level. His intelligence and ability to grasp things is second to none and he will be great for the counter-terrorism unit. That said, if I was a detective working under him on the serious crime directorate I would be sad to see him go."
Met's counter-terrorism chief quits after revealing details of operation
By Kim Sengupta, Mark Hughes and Nigel Morris | April 10, 2009
Raids to foil an alleged al-Qa'ida bomb plot, hurriedly brought forward after a blunder by a senior police officer, are yet to uncover any explosives or firearms, according to senior security sources. But further pressure was growing on the government last night after after it emerged that the suspects being questioned today may have exploited lax student visa regulations to enter the UK from Pakistan.
Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, the Metropolitan Police's counter-terrorism chief, resigned yesterday amid the furore which followed his being photographed carrying secret documents about the anti-terrorist mission to a Downing Street briefing.
Although the details on the document were not published in the British media following a prohibitive Ministry of Defence D-Notice, they appeared on an American website. It forced the police to carry out arrests of 12 suspects and searches of 14 addresses in north-west England in broad daylight, hours before they planned to do so.
Police have taken away computers, literature, maps and clothing from the premises they raided, as well as a car, but they have not, so far, found the bomb-making material needed to carry out the supposedly "imminent" multiple attacks by the suspects.
Greater Manchester Police said yesterday that they were continuing to gather evidence. Chief Constable Peter Fahy acknowledged that it was not ideal that the operation had to be moved forward but added that officers were used to dealing with "fast-moving situations".
According to security sources, some of the suspects had been trailed to pubs and nightclubs as well as shopping centres. However, Mr Fahy said: "There is no particular threat against any particular location ... I would like to say I would have no hesitation, or any of my family, in using any of those locations that have been mentioned."
Senior officers are, however, aware that being forced to move prematurely could have damaging consequences for subsequent prosecutions.
Ten of the 12 arrests on Wednesday were carried out between 5pm and 6pm. Two more men were held from just after 10pm. Eleven of the men hold Pakistani nationality and the twelfth is British of Pakistani extraction. At least seven of the men are said to have entered the UK on student visas and four are believed to have links with the city of Karachi.
According to the confidential briefing document, 10 of those arrested were "student visas Pakistan-born nationals": ie Pakistani citizens studying in Britain. Gordon Brown yesterday called on Pakistan to do more to tackle the "increasing" terrorism links the country has with Britain. The Prime Minister said: "One of the lessons we have learned from the past few years is that Pakistan has to do more to root out terrorist elements in its country as well."
He added: "We know that there are links between terrorists in Britain and terrorists in Pakistan. That is an important issue for us to follow through and that's why I will be talking to President Zardari about what Pakistan can do to help us in the future." Mr Brown defended the police operation, saying: "We are dealing with a very big terrorist plot. We must not forget that the police have been successful in carrying out their arrests ... We had to act pre-emptively to ensure the safety of the public."
Bob Quick's resignation came after a meeting with Sir Paul Stephenson and the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, yesterday morning, when it was agreed the officer would stand down. Sources said it was decided that Scotland Yard would make the announcement, but before they could do so, the London mayor Boris Johnson broke the news on Radio 4's Today programme after being told himself at 7.30am. Home Office sources saccused Mr Johnson of trying to make political capital out of the situation.
Later, Mr Quick said in a statement: "I have today offered my resignation in the knowledge that my action could have compromised a major counter-terrorism operation."
Sir Paul Stephenson, the Scotland Yard commissioner, paid tribute to Mr Quick and said John Yates, formerly the assistant commissioner of the serious crime directorate, has replaced him.
The Quick document: Decoded
The operation
Operation Pathway was, as Mr Quick's note makes clear, secret. It had been in the planning for two months and suspects had been under surveillance. As the note details, it was in relation to "suspected AQ attack planning within the UK". AQ refers to al-Qa'ida and the attacks were said to relate to targets in the North-west. Obvious places such as the Arndale shopping centre and Old Trafford football ground have been mentioned, but not confirmed.
The suspects
The briefing sheet refers to 11 subjects, 10 Pakistanis and one British national. In actual fact the raids revealed a further, unexpected, Pakistan-born national who was also arrested on suspicion of terror offences. The men were aged between their mid-teens and 41 years old.
The addresses
The plan, as detailed on Mr Quick's document, was to make arrests at seven addresses; three by Greater Manchester Police, three by officers from Merseyside and one in Lancashire. After the pictures of Mr Quick were taken the operation was brought forward and only six arrests went ahead as planned: two at a house on Galsworthy Avenue, Cheetham Hill, Manchester, three at Cedar Grove, Toxteth and one at a flat on Earle Road, Merseyside. The others were arrested; one at Liverpool John Moores University, two at a Homebase store in Clitheroe, two at a cyber café in Cheetham Hill Road and one in a white van on the M602 motorway.
The plan
The sheet refers to dynamic entry by firearms teams. This simply means that armed officers planned to raid the homes by breaking the doors down. The raids should have taken place sometime between 2am and 6am yesterday morning as opposed to during Wednesday evening. The reason for this is that suspects are at their most vulnerable when tired and unlikely to fight back. It is also likely they would have been asleep at this time and therefore undressed and unlikely to be carrying weapons.
The command structures
The note reveals the names of all of the senior officers in charge of the investigation – names that The Independent had chosen not to report – including the SIO – Senior Investigating Officer and the three Gold commanders – officers who would be in charge of overseeing the operation in each region.
The media strategy
Also mentioned is confirmation that a plan of what details were to be released to the media, and when, was in place. Like the rest of the details, it too was brought forward when a member of the media – photographer Steve Back – pictured Mr Quick with the supposedly private document.
How Boris took 'Today' by surprise
Transcript from the Today programme
Jim Naughtie: "Bob Quick's future seems to be in the balance this morning – what do you make of it?"
David Winnick MP: "It's obviously very disturbing...(but) I don't believe it's a matter for him to resign or be dismissed."
JN: I'm going to interrupt you there because we've got Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, on the line now. Good morning Mr Johnson. What, as far as you know, is happening at Scotland Yard?
Boris Johnson: "I have this morning with great reluctance and sadness as Chairman of the Metropolitan Police Authority accepted Bob Quick's resignation as head of counter-terrorism..."
JN: "David Winnick, you said you didn't think that this was a resigning matter. Mr Quick has obviously taken the view that he couldn't carry on. What do you make of it?"
DW: "It comes as no surprise. Undoubtedly Mr Quick has done very good work in combating terrorism. We shouldn't forget for one moment, whatever may be the controversy over Mr Quick, that Britain does face an ongoing terrorist danger."
Downfall of a man with Tory enemies
Out: Bob Quick
Like his surname, Bob Quick's tenure as Scotland Yard's head of counter-terrorism was brief. Appointed in March 2008, he resigned yesterday after just over a year in the role.
In that year he was dogged by controversy, and was forced to deal with no fewer than three separate scandals in the final six months of his career.
It was in stark contrast to the rapid rise he enjoyed since joining the Metropolitan Police in 1978. He moved quickly through the ranks, working as a uniformed officer and a detective before being appointed as head of the Yard's anti-corruption unit – a role reserved for officers with unblemished reputations.
A 49-year-old with five children, his profile on the Metropolitan Police website, from which he will soon be removed, lists his interests as skiing, motorcycling and walking. It also reveals that he has a masters degree in business administration from Exeter University and diploma in criminology from Cambridge University.
In 2003 he left the Met to join Surrey Police as chief constable, before returning to the capital as Assistant Commissioner in charge of specialist operations last year. He took over from Andy Hayman, who took early retirement in 2007 amid accusations of lavish expenses and questions over his relationship with a female civil servant – accusations that were later proved unfounded.
Mr Quick's problems started in November when he was named as the officer who authorised the controversial arrest of the Conservative MP Damian Green and the raid on his House of Commons office. He was backed by Sir Paul Stephenson, then Acting Commissioner, but a review raised concerns over the way police conducted the investigation.
The incident blotted his copy book enough to ensure that, when he applied for the Yard's top job late last year, he did not even make the shortlist.
After this a Sunday newspaper revealed that Mr Quick's wife ran a car-hire business from their Surrey home. Critics said that the company website, which showed cars parked outside his house, compromised his security. His reaction compounded the scandal when he accused the Conservative Party of running a media smear campaign against him. He later retracted his comments, saying: "I apologise unreservedly for any offence or embarrassment that I have caused."
That aberration appeared to have been forgotten, although police sources say that Mr Quick has rarely been at work since his outburst.
But yesterday Mr Quick made a final error. Stepping out of a car in Downing Street he inadvertently revealed the details of a sensitive terror investigation. He resigned "in the knowledge that my action could have compromised a major counter-terrorism operation", adding that he deeply regretted the disruption he had caused.
A Scotland Yard source said: "I am not surprised he has gone. If a constable or a sergeant had made the same error they would be looking at serious sanctions, perhaps dismissal. It's an incredibly basic error. For someone in his position to do it is unforgivable. You do not have to be an expert in counter-terrorism to know that you should keep sensitive documents hidden."
Rise of the officer who took on Blair
In: John Yates
As one of the most respected police officers at Scotland Yard, John Yates has a track record so impressive it is easy to see why he was the man the Commissioner turned to in yesterday's hour of need.
In 28 years at the Metropolitan Police, Mr Yates has taken on a number of high-profile investigations, with a good deal of success. Since joining the Met in 1981, after being educated at Marlborough College and King's College London, he quickly progressed through the ranks, as a uniformed officer and a detective, and has led investigations into more than 20 murders.
Between 1999 and 2000 he worked as staff officer to the then commissioner Sir Paul – now Lord – Condon during the Macpherson inquiry into the death of Stephen Lawrence. Other high profile cases he has worked on include the Jeffrey Archer perjury investigation, the Who Wants to be a Millionaire? fraud and an internal corruption inquiry which saw six Met detectives jailed for a total of 46 years.
His only setback of note was in 2005 when, as the officer in charge of the cash-for-honours investigation, he failed to bring a single charge despite interviewing 130 people at a cost of £773,177 to the taxpayer.
The one-year case centred on allegations that House of Lords peerages were offered by Labour and Conservative politicians in exchange for donations to their parties. Despite his confidence that he had built a case that would result in a trial, the Crown Prosecution Service did not bring charges. Mr Yates said his officers received "less than full co-operation".
Despite this, he is still seen as a safe pair of hands by the Met. He was the officer chosen to co-ordinate the British response to the Asian tsunami, for which he was awarded the Queen's Police Medal.
And he was the man who travelled to Brazil to apologise to the family of Jean Charles de Menezes, following the Stockwell Tube operation which saw the innocent Brazilian shot dead. He also stood on the steps of the Old Bailey to publicly apologise for mistakes in the Rachel Nickell investigation which saw Colin Stagg wrongly charged and allowed a murder investigation to go unsolved for 18 years.
A favourite of both the rank-and-file officers and the Met hierarchy, Mr Yates, 50, a keen cyclist who is married with children, was many officers' choice to become Sir Paul Stephenson's deputy when he took the top job earlier this year. But, unlike his fellow Northerner, Mr Yates preferred to stay involved in day-to-day policing.
Yesterday he became the third man in as many years, after Andy Hayman and Bob Quick, to fill the role of Assistant Commissioner in charge of specialist operations. The role gives him national responsibility for counter-terrorism.
A police source said it was easy to see why Mr Yates had been chosen for the job. He said: "He is a top man. Anybody who has worked with him will tell you he is as sharp as a tack. You will rarely come across a more professional officer than John Yates.
"Just sitting in a meeting with him is enough to make you realise that he is much sharper than any of the other officers at his level. His intelligence and ability to grasp things is second to none and he will be great for the counter-terrorism unit. That said, if I was a detective working under him on the serious crime directorate I would be sad to see him go."
Filed under
blunder,
Bob Quick,
bomb,
explosives,
inadvertent,
Liverpool,
Manchester
by Winter Patriot
on Saturday, April 11, 2009 |
link |
email |
OP home |
WP home
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)